Cocaine Possesions

        Unit 5-Individual Project/Introduction to American Court System        

Shakethia Lemons

American InterContinental University

Abstract

In this paper, the overall deliberation is the right system for the right punishment in the right jurisdiction. Many times law enforcement or the DEA come across cases dealing with drug interaction, but not having the right motives can cause a case to go cold without the proper evidence in taking that drug lord or king pin down. It is important to sort out the does and don’ts when it comes to breaking a case, knowing that state jurisdiction and the level of conviction for such crime is also essential. We will begin to research one case regarding three males who have been involve in them and how will go by of prosecuting and arresting the three men.

Choosing a System: Jurisdiction Overlap

The February 06, 2005 case against Jones in possessions of cocaine, charges should be changes to a paraphernalia due to the fact he helped in trapping those who was associated with this drug case. This case should not go to federal court but it should be sent to the Wichita municipal court instead, this case being changed to a more minor case gives the Wichita more jurisdiction in taking on this case.  

When reading the case, I noticed it never stated how much cocaine jones was using or had used. Sending Jones case to the Wichita municipal court shows him you kept your promise by given him a lighter charge with less fines. Now for example if jones decides to plead guilty his case would eventually get move to the Sedgwick County District Court in the state of Kansas federal court.

Allow jones was an informant within the case having the U.S. District Court take over the case could be good or bad for jones. The good thing would be that the court has authority to reduce the charges as promised by the DEA to jones and/or he will be given the maximum sentence for possession of cocaine.

 Reading on the case dealing with smith and the interactions he had with jones and the undercover agent it would be a case with some lose ends because, you stated that you believe he might only sell to friends and family which is not an accurate statement as to why you should arrest him also he has no prior convictions so you really can’t say if this is a cover up itself.

When it comes to cracking a case as much evidence as possible is possible needed with no lose ends. By smith not agreeing to sell to jones or the officer and not having proof if he is or not still selling to others. If you do decide to still take smith down it would have to be because you had reasonable doubt of the crime being committed or the undercover agent has the evidence admissible during court meaning in the case against smith is questionable by law.

Smith case would be sent to the U.S. District Court because, his case is being question by law and the federal court would have jurisdiction over his case due to a judge being able to answer the questionable facts about the charges brought. Needed more evidence in determining the clearness of the case would require a warrant to better support evidence that are brought fourth.

 In many cases if you are not careful of your rights or have no knowledge of your rights the government can deprive you. Due process clause consists of four-basis protection known as (McKusick, 1959):

Substantial due process, substantial due process is not listed in the United States constitution but rather important especially when it comes to the rights of children, minorities, and/ or voting.   

Procedural due process, procedural due process protects citizens or persons from government proceedings. Meaning to say it is the right to an unbiased trial, it gives the right to present evidence or call a witness. Also having the right of notified of a trial and for what reason.