I was pulled over yesterday and am now freaking out.

[Project Grudge]

I work 40 hours a week and volunteer to teach another 10 hours. So I relax during my one day off a week.

I was leaving a friend's and had just turned onto MY BLOCK when I was pulled over within eyesight of my house. The cop had me step out of the car and then he preceded to tell me my license plate light doesn't work. (Which is true because my older model doesn't even have one.)

He had me step out of the car and do sobriety tests after sobriety tests. I followed my eyes with the officer's pen. Then I walked a straight line. He had me blow into a breathalyzer where I blew a 000. Then he had me balance myself on one foot. It was early in the cold morning (I had smoked a couple of hours before hand) and I had difficulty doing it. Now he had probable cause and searched my vehicle where he found a little weed.

I've never been in trouble with the law before and I'm trying to go to grad school. I'm so terrified that having "Possession" on my record will prevent me from getting aid and getting a good job.
Keep in mind, the back of my garage always has graffiti on it and I hear of burglaries in my neighborhood all the time. However, I never hear of any of these being solved or arrests being made. I hate being poor.

[cleanhippie]

1. Get a good lawyer.

Sounds like this will be an easy one to get tossed out, but you need to get a good lawyer. Its gonna cost you, but....

[SmileyRose]

2. +1

[leftstreet]

4. This is such a no-brainer, s/he doesn't even need a 'good' lawyer

:o

[cleanhippie]

13. Okay, then what does s/he need then?

[leftstreet]

15. It was a joke

:shrug:

I got a ton of lawyer jokes, wanna hear em?

[cleanhippie]

19. Ahh, I see.

Guess I just didn't get it. No worries.

[Mendocino]

89. Why don't sharks eat lawyers?

professional courtesy.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

14. Huh?

You did notice I stated "Its gonna cost you, but..."

If the OP is that concerned about having a "possession" record, then they need to get a lawyer. Its just common sense. Do you have a better idea, or is it easier to blast me for making a suggestion? :wtf:

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

30. Have you ever heard of legal aid?

There are tons of places that provide free and reduced legal services? Do you have to be an ass because someone suggested that the accused get a lawyer? Did it ever occur to you that NOT getting a lawyer could end up costing them in the long run?

So self-righteous...no one else is trying to help but YOU, I suppose.

sP

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

34. 12 seconds worth of me making typos

and I came up with http://www.indianajustice.org/Home/PublicWeb/LegalSvcs/byCity (and this is just Indy area). Yeah, I have no idea what I am talking about and you're just being snide because someone might be willing to help rather than just pissing all over any suggestion because they are bitter at the world.

sP

[MineralMan]

36. Bobbolink, people are trying to help here. Attacking them for that

isn't probably the best idea. The OP needs to consult with an attorney. It would be better if it weren't a public defender. They're way too busy to give this much attention, if any. A lawyer can probably get this person off with no conviction, but it's going to take an attorney. Do you know of one in Indiana who would help?

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

45. What the fuck are you rambling about?

No one on this thread is talking about sending money to anyone...they're trying to help this guy with his legal troubles. But YOU being pissed off and venting about it is more important.

sP

[Name removed]

Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

48. I don't know, but you may have noticed that there's huge

support for what's happening in Madison. It's not a zero-sum thing.

As for this thread, I didn't see the person asking for money. I saw someone asking for advice. If he asks for money, I'm sure that DUers will help, if they are able to.

Calling those who are workers and union members "MUDDLECLASS" just doesn't seem appropriate to me just now. Indeed, the OP is a working person. Most of us in this thread are working people.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CreekDog]

115. most of us want a real safety net unlike what we have now and most of us vote for it

and i can't speak for others, but it's especially important to give to causes that help people (and offer personal help in appropriate amounts) in the absence of the safety net.

[bobbolink]

120. When enough of you sincerely WANT a "safety" net, there will be one.

There were announcements in the last weeks about all the CUTS, yet I didn't hear any outcry, let alone attempts at organizing resistance.

let me know when it is important enough.

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[uppityperson]

149. Maybe you didn't hear an outcry here because you have so many of us on ignore? Or maybe you

weren't here and didn't read them?

[MineralMan]

117. Bobbolink: You know nothing about me and what I do.

My wife and I donate generously to local foodbanks and homeless outreach programs. I personally have hundreds of hours of volunteer work in my history at a homeless shelter in my old city in California. You're way off base with this, and I'm sorry you don't realize that many of us here are very concerned with poverty and homelessness. I direct my efforts to the needs of my own community, and I encourage everyone to do the same in their own community. That is where efforts, money, and other donations get directly to the people who need help. I'm nowhere near where you live.

I'm very sorry for your difficulties, and hope you get the assistance you need where you live.

[bobbolink]

119. Yes, I understand that YOU believe that shelters are find permanent housing.

You are wrong, of coursse, and are quite comfortable ignoring the rampant disease that is spread in your housing of choice, (like TB being 11-14 TIMES as common in shelters as in the population at large), and I'm quite certain you will not like having the truth be spoken, but deal with it.

Just like Egypt, we don't want your CHARITY...we want JUSTICE.

Deal with it.

[MineralMan]

125. Where did you get that idea? The shelter I personally donate to

has nothing to do with permanent shelter. It has a very good program designed to find proper shelter and move people into that shelter. It also has drug treatment help, employment help, and much, much more. Its record of turning people's lives around and getting rid of their poverty is outstanding. That's why I chose it for our donations.

Yes, it deals with immediate needs, but it also does much more. As I said, you know nothing about me, yet you're telling me what I think and what I do. That's just wrong, bobbolink, and does nothing to further your cause. Again, I'm sorry about your situation, and am aware of it. I hope you find some sort of resolution for it.

[bobbolink]

127. Let me spell this out for you... ALL. SHELTERS. ARE. NOW. PERMANENT. HOUSING.

ok? Can you grasp that?

Do you need it in more simple terms?

RAYGUN destroyed low-income housing funds. DESTROYED.

There are now 9 million units of low-income housing needed.

There are 6 million available units.

That leaves THREE FUCKING MILLION UNITS SHORTFALL.

So, all people can get is a bunk in a shelter DORM. With the disease that entails.

WHEN you open your eyes and recognize the NEED, and care enough to work for it, then maybe shelter will once again be what it is suppposed to be ... TEMPORARY.

Is all of that simple enough for you?

[BobbyBoring]

147. Have you checked your PMs??

[cleanhippie]

135. Wow, you are hijacking your own hijacked sub-thread.

Actually, you have hijacked yourself about four times. Priceless.

:rofl:

[pipi_k]

105. Well here's what I would say to that...

I'll gladly give money to someone who finds him/her self in dire circumstances not of his/her own making.

If someone knowingly does something s/he knows is likely to lead to unwanted consequences, forget it.

And I would imagine others probably feel the same way.


Moral of the story:

Don't do stupid shit and expect others to rescue your (the collective "your") ass.

[WolverineDG]

56. it's this poster's standard MO

Attack anyone & any idea on how to alleviate problems for the homeless. Never offer a rational suggestion.

dg

[MineralMan]

64. I prefer to take everything one post at a time.

I'm only responding to the issues raised in this thread.

[WolverineDG]

69. ok, just letting you know nt

[bobbolink]

98. "Rational solutions" have been posted THOUSANDS of times, starting from back with Sapphire

Blue.

They are ignored.

But, go ahead and spit... it is so becoming.

[WolverineDG]

111. Oh, you mean rational solutions like building "rooming houses" for the homeless

or having local businesses donate to homeless shelters based on the # of clicks they get? Cuz you took a dump on both those ideas.

dg

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WolverineDG]

116. Rooming houses aren't "REAL" housing?

:wtf:

Donations to homeless shelters aren't good enough for you?

Then what the fuck is? A complete free ride in a 5th Avenue penthouse?

dg

[bobbolink]

118. I know it is hard to understand that people NEED A KITCHEN, and an actual BATHROOM.

I realize that is beyond the scope of muddleclass imagination, where poor people are concerned.

We are supposed to be airplants.

Deal with the rage.. because it is coming.

[MineralMan]

122. I'm sorry, but what does this all have to do with this thread?

The thread is about being busted for a small amount of marijuana, and you've tried to make it about poverty. Poverty is just a small part of this OP's situation, and he's got a job.

Why not start a thread about your particular issues and leave this poster to get assistance with what he asked about? I guess I don't understand that. I really don't. This thread is someone else's thread, and it's about a different topic altogether.

[bobbolink]

128. Connect the dots... the person is POOR. The person is in danger of losing everything.

YOU decided to protract an argument, rather than understanding what REAL NEED is.

[cleanhippie]

136. YOU connect the dots. The OP wanted HELP with a possible conviction on his record, and you hijacked

the thread with some BS that the OP was not asking for.

Instead of HELPING, you created an unproductive flame war. Congrats, well done. Mission Accomplished.

[mentalsolstice]

129. And obviously has a home! nt

[WolverineDG]

124. The type of rooming house suggested by that poster DID HAVE THOSE THINGS

in the common areas. The ones I've stayed in also had common kitchens & shared bathrooms. So if you STILL don't like that, I have no clue wtf your problem really is.

dg

[BobbyBoring]

148. While I am sorry for your situation,

I'm sure that the many people that don't have a car or a computer, or internet access would be happy top have a "Room" as opposed to living in a box or in a tent city. There are far too many of them~

[tallahasseedem]

153. +1

[CreekDog]

121. no, keep people in real housing, not shelters

if they are homeless, support them in real housing not shelters.

best to have a safety net that prevents them, many of them families with children, from becoming homeless in the first place.

i think it's frankly 19th century morality to suggest shelters for the homeless as a solution, oh it's better than being outside, but a real safety net would prevent much need for many rooming houses or shelters.

[cleanhippie]

39. So instead of offering solutions, you criticize those that do? WTF?

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

46. Yeah, cause everyone here just slings money

at anyone who needs it. You're just a peach. Maybe I could make up some bullshit and see if I could get loads of money shipped to me for just being creative. This person needs to speak to a lawyer and there are OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAN SENDING MONEY but you just insist on pissing on them.

Nice job. Your bitterness is really showing today...

sP

[bobbolink]

54. People here send money all the time. And YOUR bitterness is peachy.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

58. Usually not to an anonymous poster talking about a small legal problem

but you keep thinking I am the bitter one.

sP

[bobbolink]

86. Many, many people have that thought.

Thank you for the generous permission.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

87. Not in this instance...

you are showing it in spades.

sP

[MindPilot]

55. "muddlclass protesters who are only out for themselves"

Really?! That may be an accurate description of the teabaggers, but to use that phrase to describe the working-class protesters in Madison is just plain wrong.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

59. It sure is wrong. Without those so-called "muddleclass" protesters there will be

even more poor people. Unions are looking out for everybody.

[cleanhippie]

37. So your answer is to just ACCEPT it?

I am not following what you point is at all.

[JVS]

65. Bobbolink's point is that the OP is likely not able to use your advice due to financial constraints.

It's a reasonable point.

[JanMichael]

67. Yes and no

The OP is working 40 hours a week, and has money to buy weed. I personally don't smoke, or buy it, but I have a feeling that it's not cheap.

The guy needs to suck it up and find a lawyer, fast. Call legal aide, or borrow the money....if s/he thinks they are "poor" now, wait til they have that shit on their record.

[JVS]

71. If he's able to afford a lawyer, he should. But weed isn't really that expensive.

Saying that someone can afford a lawyer because they can afford weed, would be like thinking they can afford a lawyer because they drink beer.

[BobbyBoring]

146. $400.00 an OZ isn't expensive??

Big difference between a bag of weed and a 40!

[JVS]

155. One oz is not the typical serving size. If you compare an evening of smoking some weed...

with a night out at the bar drinking beers, you're likely to find the weed cheaper.

[MineralMan]

77. We don't actually know the person's situation. He says he hates

being poor, but that's a relative thing. He's working a full week, so there must be some resources available to him. The people in the thread are just offering the best advice they can, which is what the OP came here for. He didn't request money or anything else - just advice.

[JanMichael]

90. true that.

We really don't know the situation; and I need to remember that grad school poor of the past is very different now thanks to the horrendous student loan shit. :(

[MineralMan]

50. There's poor and there's poor. The OP says that he's working

40 hours a week and doing volunteer teaching. Some means are apparently available.

[xphile]

68. It also means that in all likelihood legal aid will not be available. You have to be

destitute to get legal aid and no one gives a damn if hiring a lawyer keeps food off your table or keeps you from paying rent. It's a legitimate point whether or not people choose to acknowledge it. Just telling people to check out legal aid is not the end all to be all solution wise.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

70. Legal aid doesn't always require you to be completely broke

and it is a first step if you cannot afford a lawyer. If that doesn't get what the OP needs, then other solutions will need to be looked at of course. And, to be honest, there are people who, believe it or not, don't even know that legal aid solutions might exist...so suggesting it is not the brush off that you seem to be implying it is...

sP

[blueamy66]

170. I know a woman who got a DUI

At her first appearance, the judge asked if she had a lawyer. She responded that she didn't. She asked for a public defender....filled out the financials and the judge stated that she made too much money for a PD. So she stated that "she would just have to wing it then, cause I have too many bills and not enough income". So he judge appointed a PD for $100.

Maybe the OP could try this route....just a suggestion.....

[MineralMan]

74. Well, the thing is that we don't really know all that much about

the OP. We know he works a full week. But that's about it. Suggesting Legal Aid is something someone did to try to be of help. Bottom line is that the person needs legal advice, probably. He's going to have to get it somewhere, unless he thinks he can deal with the situation pro se, and I doubt that would work very well.

Several people have asked pertinent questions. When the OP answers those, the advice will get better and more appropriate.

[MineralMan]

82. Most legal services that are pro bono are limited to civil cases,

anyhow, so this probably wouldn't qualify. There's a public defender's office that provides legal services for indigent defendants in criminal cases. That said, they're usually way overworked and don't always provide equivalent representation when compared to a paid attorney hired by the defendant.

Even so, we don't know whether the OP was arrested, cited, or anything else, really. So, it's difficult to offer much of anything in the way of advice.

[tammywammy]

There are lawyers that will work on a payment plan as well. n/t

[uppityperson]

38. Wow, congratulations!

she hasn't put you on ignore yet for hating poor people.

[cleanhippie]

40. But I don't hate poor people. I AM "poor people".

[uppityperson]

43. me too

however, since I challenged on an attack like this once, am now on ignore as I "hate poor people". :shrug:

[ProdigalJunkMail]

49. I would say being ignored by someone with this much

rage and hatred inside is probably a good thing. Count it as a blessing...

sP

[Liberal_in_LA]

53. Bobbolink's back!

[Obamanaut]

131. Yup. Recognized the messages without needing to read the poster's name. nt

[JNelson6563]

132. Yeah, the mean stands on it's own.

Nasty business. How to alienate friends to the cause by you-know-who.

Julie

[InvisibleTouch]

161. Unmistakable, eh?

Probably the most disruptive and nasty poster I've ever seen here. I don't understand why she hasn't been banned yet.

[JanMichael]

61. God, you are mean. That's the only word you ever notice.

Glad to see you are apparently feeling better, though.

[apples and oranges]

72. Honestly, how poor can he be

if he can afford to buy weed? :shrug: I feel for the OP though. Good luck.

[walldude]

134. How do you know he didn't grow it?

It grows like a fucking weed...

[Habibi]

78. Bobbolink!

How are you doing??

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Billy Burnett]

3. Sorry to hear about this.

As a musician who often drives home late after gigs, lesson #1 (after much tutoring by situations like yours :hug: ) = don't carry in your car, especially at night.

Keep us up to date on your case.

[hedgehog]

11. I can testify to that myself. I got pulled over at about 3AM coming home

from work. I was afraid that I had been driving on automatic and without any other traffic to cue me, I'd blown through a red red on my left turn. So the officer asked if knew why I'd been stopped, and I answered no. He checked my license and registration and let me go with a polite Good Night.

It was only later I realized that I'd been driving home the night of St. Patrick's Day, right after the bars closed.

I have to admit, the odds were excellent that he was going to pick up someone DWI.

[hollowdweller]

5. Have any bumperstickers?

Sounds like the guy made you for a stoner and then decided he was going to find out a way to search your car.

[Rex]

6. Did you show probable cause of being stoned?

Did he smell it on you? It is usually a class c misdemeanor which is the same as getting a traffic ticket, really depends on what state you live in.

[fittosurvive]

7. Depending on the state you live in, this may be nothing at all to worry about.

[mtnester]

164. If he is going to law school, he DOES have worry

I know in Ohio, even though marijuana possession convictions are misdemeanors, any conviction involving drugs, be it use or possession, disqualifies you to practice or even test to get your license, and can get you disbarred if you already have your license. So yeah, a teeny bit of weed is aserious issue for him, which is why he should get a lawyer to have the evidence thrown out on illegal search. This entire incident should also be on camera as well.

[joeunderdog]

173. Some municipalities keep track of the stated reasons officers give for traffic stops.

If they had 18 poorly lit license plate stops, you can make a case that there was another agenda.

Also, with a series of successful sobriety checks, including a breathalyzer, probable cause is in serious question. How many bites at the apple does he get?

[Project Grudge]

8. I live in Indiana

I won't be carrying it on me when I drive anymore that's for sure. He may have smelled it on me. I don't know. I also drive an old vehicle and live in a "bad" neighborhood. So that, along with my age (20s) is enough to establish guilt in a lot of minds.

[Project Grudge]

9. Also

Thank you for the heart! I really appreciate it. I'm rather despondent so a little cheer goes a long way :)

[ZombieHorde]

12. I don't have any advice, but I wish well...

:hug:

[Shagbark Hickory]

16. IF you hire a lawyer you can probably get the thing expunged. BUT. (there's a but)

Every time you get pulled over in the future, it may likely show (depending on the states computer/records system) that you've been arrested before. (but not say why)
Then when the cop asks you why you were arrested, that's when you need to keep your lips tightly zipped up. Or else they will be a searchin your car again.

Now for a lecture. If you're trying to get through grad school, you're a grown up now. You've got a long way to fall. I suggest that you don't use drugs. It can interfere with your ability to get professional licenses and you will be out of get-out-of-jail cards.

[blueamy66]

47. Don't think that there was an actual arrest.

Isn't simple possession a ticket and a court date?

[Shagbark Hickory]

133. LOL. Um, no.

Unless you're in Chicago or NYC or parts of california. Most of the country, you go to jail, even for just a teency weency bit of it.
It's really a shame that so many resources go into prosecuting people for that. Citations make more sense which is why they are used in some very big cities.

[Dappleganger]

18. Kids, kids...

keep your weed at home and take a shower before going out.

[pipi_k]

60. Now why on earth would anyone....

want to use logic?

:+

[Dappleganger]

93. Hehehe...

this old momma wouldn't want any of her own kids picked up, so hopefully they'll listen to her advice. :hippie:

[pipi_k]

101. Same here

My son (40) uses it to ease the pain from his RA.

Before it was decriminalized here in Mass I was always afraid he'd be caught with it. But if he had been, what is there to say? If it's against the law, and you get caught, you take your licks.

:shrug:

[old mark]

21. K&R-I am very sorry this happened. I used to do drug and alcohol counseling

and I have to tell you as I told everyone I counseled-that pot really is illegal. I'd try to find a lawyer now if only to speak to to get some idea of what is in store for you. I hope you have no previous record and I hope you got rid of any other illegal substances or items you may have around the house or the car.

I think pot should be legal, but the fact is that it is not.
I hope others in your situation are aware they are taking a risk if they are holding anything.

I know someone who had arrest records expunged in court and had the conviction show up years later anyway, and it cost them a civil service job.

Look in the phonebook and see if there is some sort of legal clinic that might be able to help you for free or at little cost.
If you are in school now, they might have a legal service for students at low or no cost.
Again, I am sorry, but pot is not legal.


mark

[krabigirl]

94. well..

It is decriminalized and medically legal in some states.

[old mark]

97. That is very nice. It evidently is not decriminalized where this gentleman lives.

As I said, I am not against pot-but if it IS illegal where you are and you can't take the consequences, don't do it.

It's that simple.
Doesn't help the OP much, but if there are others out there who are smoking please realize you are leaving yourself open for legal troubles that may be very costly to you for a long time to come...I KNOW it's bullshit, but it is sad reality.

mark

[MindPilot]

22. Check in with the National Motorists' Association.

They are a lobbying group for driver's rights and have a good network of attorneys.

Not saying that there are any lawyers willing to take your case pro-bono, but you can probably find someone who will work with you.

www.motorists.org

[barbtries]

24. were you arrested?

i don't know what state you're in, but look into diversion. you complete a course, go to NA meetings and no conviction. good luck.

[roody]

25. Were you arrested?

[struggle4progress]

26. You need a lawyer. I'm not one, but this portion of the Indiana Code seems relevant:

IC 35-48-4-12
Conditional discharge for possession as first offense
Sec. 12. If a person who has no prior conviction of an offense under this article or under a law of another jurisdiction relating to controlled substances pleads guilty to possession of marijuana or hashish as a Class A misdemeanor, the court, without entering a judgment of conviction and with the consent of the person, may defer further proceedings and place him in the custody of the court under such conditions as the court determines. Upon violation of a condition of the custody, the court may enter a judgment of conviction. However, if the person fulfills the conditions of the custody, the court shall dismiss the charges against him. There may be only one (1) dismissal under this section with respect to a person.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.107.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar48/ch4.html

Some things I might consider if it happened to me (but TALK ABOUT IT WITH A LAWYER!):
(1) What can I do about the lack of license plate light on my car? The car might be grandfathered on the lack of light, so a lawyer might get the stop thrown out -- but a lawyer might tell also you to get a license plate light installed.
(2) Enroll in a substance abuse program: regardless of what I may think, the court probably won't want to hear how safe and harmless I think marijuana is -- what the court wants to hear is that I know I screwed up and that I'm facing up to it

[Moosepoop]

29. Oops, I was typing up my reply when you posted yours.

Didn't mean to echo you! ;)

[struggle4progress]

51. Two minds with but a single wit

:D

[Moosepoop]

27. "Conditional discharge for possession as first offense"

http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar48/ch4.html

IC 35-48-4-12
Conditional discharge for possession as first offense
Sec. 12. If a person who has no prior conviction of an offense under this article or under a law of another jurisdiction relating to controlled substances pleads guilty to possession of marijuana or hashish as a Class A misdemeanor, the court, without entering a judgment of conviction and with the consent of the person, may defer further proceedings and place him in the custody of the court under such conditions as the court determines. Upon violation of a condition of the custody, the court may enter a judgment of conviction. However, if the person fulfills the conditions of the custody, the court shall dismiss the charges against him. There may be only one (1) dismissal under this section with respect to a person.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.107.

My advice would be to get a lawyer (obviously) and ask him/her if there's any chance of the charge being dismissed since you were pulled over for a non-existent light not working (is it the law in Indiana to have license plates illuminated even on models with no light?), or for the fact that the cop continued with sobriety testing even after conducting a breathalyzer with a zero reading. (Were you charged with simple possession, or with driving under the influence of marijuana?)

If it's just for possession, and it was indeed a small amount, then even if it was a "good" arrest you should be able to (a)plead guilty, (b)follow whatever program is ordered for you, and then (c)have the whole thing dismissed which will keep you in the clear for financial aid and employment. You'll still need a lawyer to make sure this deal is offered to you. Good luck, and let us know what happens.

[Lucky Luciano]

28. I am suing someone as a pro se attorney (Self represented)

It is a massive fucking pain in the ass, but if you cannot afford a lawyer, you may have to represent yourself and do some serious investigating.

For example right now, I have to learn how to counter the other party's lawyer who is trying to say my email evidence is inadmissible - I am learning how I can get the email evidence admitted which should not be a problem outside ofthe fact that it is a major pain in the ass. Sometimes I wish I could just get justice caveman style (fact is I would settle the case by being allowed to smash his fucking kneecaps with a baseball bat in return for not getting paid - I would consider that fair and square) because this has been such a nuisance suing this asshole who stole $35K from me by selling my intellectual property and keeping all the money.

It is a major distraction from my day job in which I work 60-70 hours per week, but I will not let this guy humiliate me and make me look stupid by stealing from me. More than anything I want to smash his fucking kneecaps for playing me for a chump - has a lot more to do with that than the money.

It takes a lot of persistence to do this, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

[dorktv]

156. we are told to call you self represented litigants in the justice system

but that was immediately changed to SRLs which defeated the whole purpose of changing from the Latin to English.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our first quarter 2011 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

Click here to donate

[MineralMan]

33. Were you arrested? Issued a citation?

If you were arrested, you definitely need a lawyer. If you were given a citation, you should also consult with one. Indiana is not one of the states that has decriminalized possession of small quantities. They have a conditional release program, but you need to know how to get that done, and a lawyer can help you.

In states where possession of small quantities is still a punishable misdemeanor, it's a serious mistake to have the stuff on you or in your car.

[madokie]

35. We all hate being poor

I can sympathize with you on that.
We haven't seen poor yet or what the big man and his big pockets of money want for us.

We think we've seen hard times bro'/sis but the shit is about to hit the fan as your experience is proof of.
We need a house and senate cleansing and badly.

[MindPilot]

41. I'm not a lawyer, but here are the issues that come to my mind

First off, just about everything with wheels has had a license light since like 1920, so I doubt if "not equipped" is going fly.

The cop I doubt could demonstrate probable cause for a field sobriety test since he pulled you over for an equipment violation, not a moving violation. The fact that he continued a field sobriety test--to the point of badgering you into failing it--after you passed the breathalyzer is I think definitely improper procedure.

Were you arrested or just cited?

To the police there are only two kinds of people, cops and criminals. You, driving an old car, late at night, in a poor neighborhood made you automatically a criminal in his mind. Once he pulled you over and found not the gang-banger or drunk he was hoping for, got frustrated and decided to find something. If it wasn't the pot, it would have been something else. Really you probably were lucky you had some weed in the car. If not for the pot, the cop may have been desperate enough for a bust that he would have escalated it into a physical confrontation.

[struggle4progress]

80. IC 9-19-6-4 Tail lamps

Sec. 4. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section:
(1) a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer; and
(2) any other vehicle that is drawn at the end of a train of vehicles;
must be equipped with at least one (1) tail lamp mounted on the rear that when lighted as required in this chapter, emits a red light plainly visible from a distance of five hundred (500) feet to the rear.
(b) Only the tail lamp on the rear-most vehicle of a train of vehicles is required to be seen from the distance specified.
(c) Excluding a truck-tractor semitrailer-semitrailer combination equipped with a B-train assembly (as defined in IC 9-13-2-13) governed by section 7 of this chapter, truck-tractor, motorcycle, or motor-driven cycle:
(1) a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, and pole trailer; and
(2) any other vehicle drawn at the end of a train of vehicles;
that is registered in Indiana and manufactured or assembled after January 1, 1956, must be equipped with at least two (2) tail lamps mounted on the rear that, when lighted, complies with this section.
(d) A tail lamp upon a vehicle shall be located at a height of not less than twenty (20) inches and not more than seventy-two (72) inches.
(e) Either a tail lamp or a separate lamp must be placed and constructed so as to illuminate the rear registration plate with a white light and make the plate clearly legible from a distance of fifty (50) feet to the rear. A tail lamp or tail lamps, together with a separate lamp for illuminating the rear registration plate, must be wired so as to be lighted whenever the head lamps or auxiliary driving lamps are lighted.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.7. Amended by P.L.34-2010, SEC.2.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title9/ar19/ch6.html

[otohara]

52. Did He Give You a Ticket?

be remorseful, say you're on financial aid and you'll lose it if they find out, tell them about the tutoring you do, etc....

The DA will most likely work with you and you'll pay a fine.

[mrmpa]

57. he had no probable cause for the sobriety tests hence he had

no probable cause to search the car. This was a ticket only (which will be thrown out because the older model doesn't have one). Public defender will be able to get this thrown out totally.

I was a cop 20 years ago.

[pipi_k]

66. I would beg to differ, I think...

The cop was there. You weren't.


The OP said he had had a long week at work. Maybe he was tired. Maybe being tired, along with a bit of herbal indulgence, caused his driving skills to deteriorate a bit.

Under those circumstances, I would expect the cop to administer a sobriety test.

Like I said, none of us was there but the OP, and I'll bet if asked, he would probably say he was driving "just fine".

[mrmpa]

76. No I wasn't there. But if the stop was for the tail light it shouldn't have gone any further- eom

[pipi_k]

85. And that's the real question...

was the stop only for the burnt out light?

Did the cop notice a bit of erratic driving and just not mention it?


But even if the stop only involved, at first, the light, perhaps there was something about the OP's demeanor or physical appearance or odor that made him suspicious.

I don't know that, and neither do you.


Another cop might not have noticed anything.

This one, however, felt he had some sort of probable cause, and, as it appears, he was correct.

[Statistical]

169. Exactly.

The cop believed he had probable cause.

There is no way anyone other than a judge (after hearing all arguments) can definitely say the cop did or did not have probable cause.

Probable cause is the total sum of on the spot evidence. The driver demeanor, observed motor skills, odor, etc.

Now it is possible that a good lawyer will get either the search or the search AND sobriety test dropped but only a judge can say if the search lacked probable cause.

[kudzu22]

62. Please tell me you didn't consent to a search

I'm no lawyer but it sounds like the probable cause is on shaky ground.

[guruoo]

63. IN pot law: '*Possible conditional discharge on first offense.'

'The possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. For first offenders, the court may consider a conditional discharge. For possession of more than 30 grams, the penalties range from 6 months - 3 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.'

http://www.legaljoint.net/state_by_state/Indiana.asp?p=Indiana&state=20&mmj=2

However, you may be able to get it dropped entirely if you can get the court date
delayed until later in the year...

Ind. Senate panel advances marijuana, meth bills
By TOM DAVIES -
By The Associated Press

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — A state Senate committee on Tuesday backed having the state crime policy panel
study whether Indiana should legalize marijuana after hearing a legislator with multiple sclerosis
say he wished he could legally try the drug to relieve his pain.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-16/ind-senate-panel-advances-marijuana-meth-bills.html

[struggle4progress]

73. Here's something else that might be relevant:

IC 35-48-4-15
Driver's license and motor vehicle registration; suspension
Sec. 15. (a) If a person is convicted of an offense under section 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, or 11 of this chapter, or conspiracy to commit an offense under section 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, or 11 of this chapter, and the court finds that a motor vehicle was used in the commission of the offense, the court shall, in addition to any other order the court enters, order that the person's:
(1) operator's license be suspended;
(2) existing motor vehicle registrations be suspended; and
(3) ability to register motor vehicles be suspended;
by the bureau of motor vehicles for a period specified by the court of at least six (6) months but not more than two (2) years.
(b) If a person is convicted of an offense described in subsection (a) and the person does not hold an operator's license or a learner's permit, the court shall order that the person may not receive an operator's license or a learner's permit from the bureau of motor vehicles for a period of not less than six (6) months.
As added by P.L.67-1990, SEC.13. Amended by P.L.107-1991, SEC.3; P.L.129-1993, SEC.2; P.L.64-1994, SEC.6; P.L.76-2004, SEC.23.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title35/ar48/ch4.html

Really. Talk to a lawyer.

[Leonardo Da Biker]

75. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

It's not like you committed an axe murder or something like that.
Still, if you're concerned about this following you around and causing you trouble down the road then maybe you should ask yourself WTF were you doing driving around with weed in your car? Just sayin'...

[JVS]

79. Did he say anything or did he just do all that and let you go?

[Xithras]

81. Three important things.

1. Drug convictions and FAFSA. Any drug conviction will automatically disqualify you for FAFSA if it occurs during the FAFSA coverage period. Because you're not a current student, that shouldn't be a concern. Drug convictions only matter on future FAFSA applications if they're felonies, in which case you'll be required to go to rehab before you can qualify again, and even then there's a minimum 1 year waiting period between the conviction date and any future eligibility. It doesn't sound like your amount is enough to qualify as a felony, but if they do charge it that way, you will need a lawyer. Poor or not, a felony conviction will screw your future education plans.

2. On the same token, I'm a college prof. You didn't mention your eventual planned field of employment, but I noticed that you volunteer to teach. If you planned on teaching, please be aware that most educational institutions now require you to disclose any convictions for any non-infractional crime you've ever committed. When I turned in my application and CV more than a decade ago, I was confronted with the simple question, "Have you ever been convicted of a crime?" I answered "No, which was technically a lie. I was convicted of misdemeanor petty theft as a child (Well, at 14), which should have been part of my sealed juvenile record. As it turns out, even "sealed" records show up during the federal background check now required of school employees. I was very nearly fired for failing to disclose it, and only managed to keep my job after getting called onto the carpet in front of our Chancellor and pleading my case personally. I was eventually placed on probationary status for two years!

So, yes, it may have an impact. To avoid this, you MUST get it expunged. If the court offers a diversion program leading to expungement, TAKE THEM UP ON THE OFFER. You may think it's a pain in the ass and unfair but trust me, having to divulge and explain a stupid teenager moment decades after the fact is even more of a pain in the ass.

3. Several other people here have asked whether there was probable cause. Forget this tactic. Courts have repeatedly ruled that "smelling marijuana" is probable cause to search a car. It sucks, but it's reality. People try this tactic to escape convictions regularly, and it rarely works. When you go to court, the officer will be able to show that he found marijuana, and when asked why he searched, he merely needs to claim that he "smelled it". Even if the answer is a bald faced lie, you're faced with an unfortunate truth. You can't prove that he didn't. Only you and he were there, only you and he smelled it. Knowing that you had the weed, it's unlikely that you're going to get much sympathy from the judge with this route.

[Project Grudge]

83. I was not arrested.

he gave me a summons and said I'd have a court date. Thanks for all the advice. I screwed up and am paying the price...

[BobbyBoring]

150. You're well on your way

Hey, life is full of lessons and they're easier to learn if you admit to your mistakes!

Hope it works out bro!

[Codeine]

84. If you're smart enough to be a grad student

you should be smart enough not to drive around with weed in your car.

That said, getting a first-time offense for a small amount of weed expunged from your record should be easy, though it will likely entail drug classes and a monitoring period.

[formercia]

88. Never carry any more than you can make disappear in 10 seconds or less

Not disparage you. I empathize with you.

People who carry illegal drugs with them are taking a very big risk. It doesn't matter what you think your rights are or should be.
I've done stupid shit in my day too. Most of us have. We think back and breathe a sigh of relief that we weren't arrested and sent to prison. There are Millions in prison today who would have behaved differently had they known what was in store for them when the pushed the envelope a little too far.

Rant off.

[pipi_k]

95. hahahaha excellent advice!!!

I think it should be legal, but whatever...

Where possessing it is likely to mess up one's future, your advice is fantastic.


Smoke it. get rid of the evidence.

:7

[TorchTheWitch]

91. Boo hoo - being poor doesn't have fuck-all to do with it

and neither does the burglaries or vandalism in your neighborhood.

Here's an idea - don't drive impaired and don't possess an illegal substance particularly in a place like your car where it is more likely it will be discovered.

Personally, I don't think pot should be illegal, but that's not the point. Even if it was legal you still would have been driving impaired. Smoke all the dope you want, but store it where it's least likely to be found and don't fucking drive under the influence.

NOW you're worried about how this may affect your future??? A little foresight would have taken care of that by not assuming that you could drive impaired and keep an illegal substance in your car where it's most likely to be found and would never have to face the possibility of consequences. The responsibility is yours alone for willfully and knowingly breaking the law - deal with it like an adult and quit crying about it and trying to blame everyone else for your bad judgment.

[Codeine]

99. You're gonna get dogpiled,

but I can't see where you're wrong here. It should be legal, but it ain't; until it is legal, treat it like you would any other illicit substance -- with due care.

[TorchTheWitch]

140. Thank you

And of course I'll be dogpiled... hey, it's DU, I'd be shocked if I didn't. But I don't care.

I'm sick of people not thinking ahead and when they don't and willfully and knowingly make bad choices and get caught THEN they freak out, want sympathy and blame everyone but their own stupid and selfish selves.

And I'll NEVER have one iota of sympathy for anyone that willfully and knowingly drives impaired. Throw the fucking book at them.

[XemaSab]

100. What the hell shit is this?

We've all done stupid-ass things before.

I smashed a rental car into a rock and it cost me $700. It was a DUMB MISTAKE.

I got a ticket for going 80 MPH on Interstate 5. It was a DUMB MISTAKE. I wasn't paying attention to how fast I was going. Or that there was a cop behind me.

I flunked a final because my back hurt and I popped a vicodin before doing the final. It was a DUMB MISTAKE.

I got pulled over by the park service rangers FOR HAVING A BURNED-OUT LIGHT OVER MY LICENSE PLATE, and I really dodged a few bullets. If they had known what I knew I had been up to, they would have written me BOOCOO tickets.

PEOPLE DO DUMB THINGS. DRIVING AROUND WITH WEED IN YOUR CAR IS DUMB. PEOPLE DO IT.

If driving around with weed in the car is the dumbest thing the author of the OP ever does, then he can count himself lucky.

[pipi_k]

107. I don't think the issue is that people do dumb things, really....

The issue is that people do dumb things knowing those dumb things could screw up their lives, then whine over the consequences. Like it's some huge secret. OMG!!! I didn't KNOW that carrying weed would get me xxx penalty!!!!


OK...a five year old wouldn't know there are consequences for carrying weed.

But any adult with an IQ over 99? They do know. Unless they've been living under a rock their whole lives.

If it's illegal, dangerous, or immoral and you do it, don't act like the penalty is a huge surprise...

[oldhippie]

137. Carrying weed in your car is not a "mistake" .....

... it's a "decision." I hate it when people say, "I made a mistake when I tried to rob that 7-11." No, it wasn't a mistake, it was a bad decision. Mistakes are unintentional, like transposing two numbers on a check, or spelling a word wrong because you don't understand the difference between their, there, and they're. Carrying weed in your car, or popping a Vicodin before taking a final, are not mistakes, they're poor decisions. The reason they are poor decisions is that they are liable to have bad, but forseeable, consequences. Now the OP is whining about his poor decision. No sympathy here. I've kept my nose clean for 50+ years without any "poor decisions" on my official record. It's not that hard when you think about it. If you don't (or decide not to) break the law you're not likely to get a criminal record.

Sorry, but it is one of my hot button issues.

[TorchTheWitch]

143. there's a world of difference between a dumb mistake and

willfull and knowing stupidity. No fucking excuses for willfull and knowing stupidity. If you're going to willfully and knowingly break the law then at least be adult about it and accept your responsibility and LEARN from your bad judgments.

Driving impaired is not only dangerous it is willfull and knowing STUPIDITY that ANY adult is intelligent enough to know is dangerous, stupid and grossly selfish.

Possessing an illegal substance is willful and knowing STUPIDITY that ANY adult is intelligent enough to know to hide in a less conspicuous place and if they get caught with it, tough shit. Or better yet, don't use or possess an illegal substance. Ain't that fucking hard.

I was smart enough to know this shit when I was a very young teenager and made choices accordingly and I'm hardly an Einstein. Yes, people make "dumb mistakes" like driving impaired and stashing their weed right in their car because they are STUPID and SELFISH and should learn the hard way not to be so STUPID and SELFISH instead of having excuses like "everybody does it" made for them.

[Dappleganger]

104. While I agree with the overall concepts of this...

your delivery SUCKS.

[KurtNYC]

106. I re-read the OP after your post -- OP doesn't say 'not responsible'

just basically says 'worried about the future.'

Also the charge is for possession; not for driving impaired. The cop tested him and could have gone for that if he thought it was the best charge. Apparently he didn't.

And being poor DOES have something to do with how these kinds of things play out.

[TorchTheWitch]

151. indirectly he/she most certainly did

"I'm not responsible" is EXACTLY what is really being said when things like the neighborhood burglaries and vandalism are brought up. What they are REALLY saying is that they should not have gotten caught or face any consequences because the police should be looking "over there" instead of at them. None of us are so stupid as to not know that is EXACTLY what the OP was doing in bringing that up.

The "being poor" excuse is another sore point with me. I'm unemployed with no savings whatsoever, could never afford school much less graduate school and somehow managed to not be so STUPID and SELFISH as to break the law assuming that there should be no consequences for me. And I certainly would never even dream of using the "I'm poor" excuse for having to face consequences I KNEW I'd have to face should I be caught for being so STUPID and SELFISH to make such ridiculously poor judgments.

Yes, unfortunately not having enough money for a fancy high dollar lawyer to clean up your STUPID and SELFISH bad judgments happens, which is yet ANOTHER reason the OP should have added this into his/her calculations when making such willfully and knowingly STUPID and SELFISH bad judgments... it's the WORST excuse for crying about getting caught and does nothing but add to the false perception that poor people are more STUPID and SELFISH then those with the money for those fancy high dollar lawyers to clean up their messes when it's one thing I've noticed is that the opposite is far more true.

[KurtNYC]

165. well I read it very differently -- just someone who KNOWS they screwed up

venting and panicking. The stuff about graphitti is just "why me?"

And again since there is no charge for impaired driving -- not DUI, not DWI -- I don't see what is SELFISH about having weed in your car? The charge is possession, NOT drunk/buzzed driving.

Really sounds TO ME like this is growing experience. Busted for the first time and now appropriately worried about the consequences.

[MindPilot]

109. Thank you, Captain Hindsight! Now please stow the moralizing.

And as for your accusation of "impaired", there is nothing to suggest the OP was impaired. According to the OP's account he was pulled over for an equipment violation.

[TorchTheWitch]

152. the OP stated he/she failed the sobriety test

which was what he/she claimed was used as the reason for the car search. Thus, they admitted they were impaired.

No, I'm not going to let willfull and knowing stupidity and selfishness slide. Don't like it, don't read it. Hell of a society we live in when pointing out one's willfull and knowing stupidity and selfishness in breaking the law and crying about it when they get caught is termed "moralizing".

It's hardly hindsight that is the issue here, which you well know. It's the foresight any intellingent adult has in knowing that willfully and knowingly breaking the law is bad judgment and should they get caught they need to accept their responsibility and the consequences. The OP massively failed in the foresight department, knows it and still isn't willing to accept their responsibility and consequences of their stupid and selfish actions. Boo fucking hoo. No sympathy. No excuses.

[tallahasseedem]

142. Best response on this thread...

Some of these responses are cracking me up.

[Scruffy1]

102. Were you ticketed? Arrested?

Seems like a graduate school student could get the facts straight.

[Gold Metal Flake]

103. Hold the fuck on for a minute...

The cop had me step out of the car and then he preceded to tell me my license plate light doesn't work. (Which is true because my older model doesn't even have one.)

You wrote "car" not "truck". If your car is post-war (1946 or newer) you MUST have a light for your license plate. You may be confused as to where it is, but you must have one. You need to check that light now to see if it is working or not. If you are still unsure of where it is post the make, model and year of your car. If your car has a relocated plate or some sort of aftermarket plate holder that puts the plate in a non-stock location and the plate is not lit them WTF are you doing driving out after dark? Any lighting falfunction is grounds for a stop.

[oldhippie]

138. I was wondering if someone was going to bring that up .....

AFAIK, licence plate lights have been required since at least the '50's.

[Raine]

145. I was stopped one time for a burned out license light (I didn't know it was out)

around that same time 2:00-3:00 in the morning. I was coming from father's house and on the way home. The cops gave me a really hard time, questioning me about where I'd been where I was going etc. I felt really scared because it was so late and under an overpass no other cars around. It seems they take burned out license plate lights very seriously, causes immediate suspicion. They finally let me go and the next day I had the light replaced, you bet I did!

[joeunderdog]

174. who needs to "step out of a car" for an equipment violation?

Isn't that a ticket with a 10-day window to get it fixed?

[Gold Metal Flake]

176. You get out when ordered to get out.

At that time of night, an "equipment violation" is an opportunity for a cop to fuck with you and try to make a bust. It's probable cause to stop you and see if you are drunk. I thought people were aware of this. It's been doing on for about a century.

[XanaDUer]

108. Okay, here goes

I'm not a lawyer , and this happened over 15 years ago. Poor or not, you need to hire your own attorney. This happened to a friend, and I had to loan him $2500 to do so. We were friends with the guy's wife, and that was the discount price.

You know you screwed up. It happens. People do dumb things all the time, and it would be a shame to jettison your future b/c of this. Of course, don't do it again and, as someone said up thread - you really need to get that light thing fixed. You'll keep getting pulled over after dark.

So, my friend hires the lawyer, who pleads to something or other, no court date, and my friend has to complete rehab 12-step and, supposedly, his record was expunged of this. Not sure what the deal in your state is, so, if you are smart enough to be in grad school, you need to do some of your own research on this as it applies to your state. And, once this occurs and is over, you'd better run your own background check, on yourself, just to make sure what turns up before you apply for any jobs or whatever. Keep records of everything. Buy a file just for this incident, 'cause you're gonna be the King or Queen of paperwork for quite a while. Get everyone's name you speak to regarding this.

Not sure what the neighborhood has to do with this, though. Yeah, being poor sucks and, if you were the kid of the mayor, you'd probably be let go with a laugh and a warning. We don't live in that kind of world tho, when you're poor. Best of luck.

EDIT - Typo.

[minavasht]

110. OK,

were you charged and arrested for a DUI? If you weren't, there was no PC for entering your vehicle.
Something does not add up.

[Shandris]

112. OP, Fellow Hoosier here

Any decent lawyer offers Free Consultations. While everything is still fresh, write down EVERYTHING that happened, from just before the cop until after he drove away. All salient details, even down to if it was a windy day. Then take your copy of the event, a copy of your summons, and go get a free consultation. Ask why you weren't arrested, what that means regarding the summons, and so forth.

What does the summons specifically say? Are you sure he didn't let you walk on the weed and just cite you for the light? I can't seem to get over that little nugget -- that you were not arrested.

Anyway, ask the lawyer about a pre-trial diversion and the likelihood of it. Then ask if he will work a payment plan out with you (they usually will, with a solid retainer of 4-800 dollars but not always).

Good luck, OP. :)

[Xicano]

113. No Corpus Delicti, No Case.

The 'complaint' they filed against you is not a case. They first have to establish 'standing'. No standing, then, the court doesn't have 'subject matter jurisdiction.'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8lLdHV1Myk

(con't)>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9BlUwumFIE

(con't)>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t8v5MrqPEM

[pipi_k]

126. Not sure what you're talking about here so

I asked Mr P, who is a retired cop. He didn't have a clue either.

Would you mind translating this into English please?

thanks

[aikoaiko]

130. You should be freaking out. A drug conviction can fook up your financial aid eligibility...

but all it not lost. First, I would double check that the particular charge is disqualifying for financial aid. Any financial aid officer at a university should be able to answer your question. Second, as others have said, hire a good attorney. I predict it will cost between $2500 and $5000. Beg and borrow from family or friends if you don't have the cash. Use a credit card if you have to. This is your career. Most of the jobs I applied for ask about felonies only. Your mileage may vary.

Lastly, I suggest doing what I did when I became an adult. I stopped smoking weed because of the penalties relating to financial aid and now it could end my job if I were arrested for that.

[cigsandcoffee]

139. What were you driving, a Model T?

Cars have had license plate bulbs since like the 40s.

[BobbyBoring]

141. OH FUCK!

Listen all,

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

After you blew 000, you were clear. When you are pulled over there's a point where you are one of two things. Under arrest or free to go. One or the other. There was no proable cause in your case.

I'm sure you can beat it but you will have to pay a bunch of $$ for a liar.

Lesson #2. NEVER CARRY MORE THAN YOU CAN EAT!

[JVS]

157. Actually driving while stoned can count as a DUI even if he blew a 0 for alcohol.

[Statistical]

168. Blowing 0 isn't a get out of jail free card. It is called DUI not DWD.

While he blew 0 he showed signs which indicated he was impaired. That was the probable cause.

Now it is likely he could have resisted the search but the cop would simply have detained him and got a speed warrant and done and even more thorough search.

Now a good lawyer may be able to argue the search was invalid (he was stopped for bad license plate light, does the law allow older vehicles to be grandfathered in). The probable cause came completely from the road side sobriety test, was it recorded on police dashboard camera?

Still the idea that you can FAIL a sobriety test and simply drive away it naive at best. It is a good way to end up in handcuffs.

[rug]

144. You should be ok.

IC 35-48-4-11
Possession of marijuana, hash oil, or hashish
Sec. 11. A person who:
(1) knowingly or intentionally possesses (pure or adulterated) marijuana, hash oil, or hashish;
(2) knowingly or intentionally grows or cultivates marijuana; or
(3) knowing that marijuana is growing on his premises, fails to destroy the marijuana plants;
commits possession of marijuana, hash oil, or hashish, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony (i) if the amount involved is more than thirty (30) grams of marijuana or two (2) grams of hash oil or hashish, or (ii) if the person has a prior conviction of an offense involving marijuana, hash oil, or hashish.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.106; Acts 1979, P.L.303, SEC.12; P.L.138-1983, SEC.5.

IC 35-48-4-12
Conditional discharge for possession as first offense
Sec. 12. If a person who has no prior conviction of an offense under this article or under a law of another jurisdiction relating to controlled substances pleads guilty to possession of marijuana or hashish as a Class A misdemeanor, the court, without entering a judgment of conviction and with the consent of the person, may defer further proceedings and place him in the custody of the court under such conditions as the court determines. Upon violation of a condition of the custody, the court may enter a judgment of conviction. However, if the person fulfills the conditions of the custody, the court shall dismiss the charges against him. There may be only one (1) dismissal under this section with respect to a person.
As added by Acts 1976, P.L.148, SEC.7. Amended by Acts 1977, P.L.340, SEC.107.

See an Indiana lawyer.

[rasputin1952]

154. Get in touch w/Legal Aid, they work for free...

or on a sliding scale.

For one thing, if the cop had you stand on one foot after you blew a .000, he was wrong, he had all of the evidence he needed to assume you were innocent of DWI. Pulling you over for a license plate light is idiotic at best, and does not give him free reign to put you to all kinds of garbage. In fact, if your vehicle was not equipped w/a light, he had no valid reason to pull you over in the first place. Once it was shown that there was no light, that was the end of it, unless he had cause to suspect something else, and that is still far away from realistic, considering what he initially pulled you over for.

Get with Legal Aid, make sure you write down what happened, everything as you remember it and be prepared to be honest and forthright, depending on how much you had, and the laws in Indiana, this is either a minor infraction that may not show up on any record at all, or, be a misdemeanor that would not sow up anyway, unless a security clearance is involved.

Get w/Legal Aid if you can't afford a lawyer, there are enough holes in this, the DA might just say, This is ridiculous...but that's why you get a lawyer, so they can speak on equal terms...Good Luck!

[upi402]

158. I'm so sorry

This is a crime and punshment fetishistic society now. Best to not give them a chance to put you in the system.

Many can't rent an apartment or get a job since 9-11 because they have a felony. Now everybody wants a background check with no time limitation. It's a scarlet letter - no difference in practice.

[dorktv]

159. Have the filed formal charges against you? Or was this a DUI?

Felony charges take a bit longer to handle then a simple ticket.

Speak to Legal Aid for your state or the local law school-newbie attorneys can help at least some.

[Joe Fields]

160. So you are in your early 20's? You will get over it. No big deal.

[RandomThoughts]

162. Function not data. Everyone has that on their record.

Although the terminology is a label that has many ideas in it.

I should explain a doctrine. In the movie Equilibrium there was a group that though all feeling was bad. There is a group that thinks all feeling is a form of possession. Easiest metaphor is feeling is a shared dll(metaphor), think of them as virtue level angels, and fallen angel counterparts for the worse feelings. Sorrowman is basically a virtue fallen angel. Then there are other spiritual feelings from songs stories and many other things that move people.

But some people think any feeling is bad, since it is something that does not let only critical feeling make decisions. That is why some burn out, they actually think any feeling is bad, and sometimes good feelings can cause strife if you do wrong often. Some think any feeling is bad, and that any feeling is an intrusion on what they think is the state of man, robotic thinking and not feeling.

That is where some of the 'no feeling' doctrines come from.

That is why a live comedy show is funnier, and why in a room of smiling people it is easier to smile, and many other geographic feelings that move between and around people.

Ever been around a water cooler and someone gossips about someone, you gossip also, then later think that it was not the best thing to do, that is a gossip like 'thing' spreading between people. So feelings move between people by many ways.

Everyone has that on there record. See original sin doctrine, if any religious types are being judgmental about some comments. And there is good side usually referred to as inspired, but each person should decide when that is.

[Statistical]

167. Squirrels are funny. Ham is the meat of monsters. n/t

[RandomThoughts]

171. May you find mercy.

Not much else to say about that.

Many try to tell me who are the monsters, and become a monster in doing that.

Explain what is done, how it is done, why it is done, and for what better or worse effect, feel and think on that, and try to explain to help those wrong learn, and to learn when you are wrong.

Calling someone a monster does nothing but give you an excuse to ignore where people can be helped.





It might not have been your intent, but what many don't know, is all that stuff about some group 'suppose' to be being in a bad place, is to give a superiority complex to some other group so they wont care about them.

It is to rationalize consolidations without any feeling or thoughtful explanation.

Weather you like it or not, the 'curses' of groups, even if true or not, may not be the groups you think they are, since those groups don't have the superiority complex that is part of the fall explained before then.

Think and feel on it, people don't know who is in this or that group, they say they know the difference of good and evil to not care about people.

[Obamanaut]

163. "I followed my eyes with the officer's pen...." This may have been a

contributing factor in the testing process.

[KurtNYC]

166. True bc the cops don't like it when you take their pens n/t

[backscatter712]

172. Lawyer up.

It depends upon the state - in some, an MJ possession charge isn't a big deal - like getting a speeding ticket, in others, you could get major jail time.

I think a good lawyer can get it pled down to something like disorderly conduct, or get you in a diversion program where you have to jump through some hoops like a drug propaganda class & community service and such, and keep your nose clean for a while, in exchange for keeping your record clean.

[jeanpalmer]

175. Use the diversion process outlined

in the statute and mentioned by others. At the end of it, with no other convictions, it will be wiped off your record as if it had never happened.

An officer can conduct a search of your car incident to an arrest. But it appears he never arrested you for DUI (apparently you passed the DUI tests or he would have arrested you for it), and could only issue a citation for the license plate. Therefore, no arrest and no authority to conduct a search of your car incident to an arrest.

Another basis for a search of the car would have been if the officer had probable cause to believe the car contained evidence of a crime. If he walked by your car and smelled the weed, then he had probable cause to believe the car contained evidence of a crime, and he had the legal authority to conduct a search. Could he smell the weed? Had you been smoking it in your car? Was there an odor of it just from your breathing in the car? Probably so. If he can testify to the odor, case closed against you.

But get a copy of the police report and see what the officer cites as a basis for the search, just to make sure he stayed within the above rules. If he says he smelled marijuana from your car, then the issue is settled and you've lost.

Someone above asked you if you gave permission to search your car? If you gave permission, the officer didn't need to smell marijuana, or have probable cause, or make an arrest -- once you give permission, he has the authority to search. That's why you never give permission. Always politely refuse. If he asks for permission, it means most likely he doesn't have any other legal basis to search your car; if he did, he wouldn't be asking you for permission. It's hard to say no, but it's the best thing to do.

[SidDithers]

177. I'd go with the Chewbacca defense...

it's almost foolproof when done correctly.

Sid