Category Archives: Drug Offenses

New “Blake Fix” Drug Possession Law Takes Effect July 1, 2023

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Legislation, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Gov. Jay Inslee signs drug possession law 'fix' | The Reflector

SB 5536, the so-called “Blake Fix,” passed the Washington State Legislature (Legislature) and was signed by Governor Jay Inslee. Its provisions involve the use and possession of drugs. Passage of the bill was welcome news for many Washington cities and counties that were rushing to pass their own ordinances.

The bill makes it a gross misdemeanor to:

  1. Knowingly possess counterfeit substances and controlled substances (hereafter “prohibited substances”); or
  2. Knowingly use prohibited substances in a public place.

This bill covers possession and use of counterfeit or controlled substances, or “hard” drugs such as fentanyl and other opioids, methamphetamine, heroin, and cocaine. Also prohibited is the knowing possession of non-prescribed legend drugs, as well as their knowing use in a public place, both classified as misdemeanors. The bill also creates a pre-trial diversion program and almost completely preempts local regulation of drug paraphernalia.

BACKGROUND

In February 2021, the Washington State Supreme Court in State v. Blake. The Blake case was immediately mired in controversy.  It declared unconstitutional Washington’s strict liability drug possession law, which criminalized the unintentional, unknowing possession of a controlled substance.

In July 2021 – and in response to the fallout from Blake– the Legislature adopted temporary  legislation making it a misdemeanor to knowingly possess prohibited substances. This temporary legislation required that law enforcement refer the individual to assessment and treatment for their first two arrests for simple possession. Upon the third arrest, the individual could be prosecuted. However, this proved nearly impossible for law enforcement to implement, given that there was no state-wide tracking system for referrals.

Fast forward to the 2022-2023 regular legislative session, which ended without passage of a new drug possession and use law. This challenge placed cities and counties in the unfortunate situation of adopting their own patchwork of possession and use laws. However, in a special session on May 16, 2023, the Legislature adopted permanent drug-related legislation in SB 5536.

DRUG POSSESSION & USE ARE GROSS MISDEMEANORS

Both knowing possession of prohibited substances and knowing use of a prohibited substance in a public place are gross misdemeanors. Gross misdemeanors typically have a maximum imprisonment time of not more than 364 days, plus a fine of not more than $5,000.

Knowing possession and knowing use of a legend drug without a prescription remains a misdemeanor. Misdemeanors have a maximum imprisonment time of not more than 90 days, plus a fine of not more than $1,000. An individual cannot be charged with both possession and use relating to the same course of conduct.

Notably, referral or diversion is no longer required. Nevertheless, law enforcement and prosecutors are encouraged to refer or divert such cases for assessment, treatment, or related services. Rather, both possession and use of controlled and counterfeit substances are punishable by imprisonment of up to 180 days or by a fine of not more than $1,000, or both. If the defendant has two or more prior convictions of possession or use, then imprisonment can be increased to up to 364 days (or the $1,000 fine, or both).

REGULATING DRUG PARAPHERNALIA

The bill regulates drug paraphernalia as follows:

  • Selling or permitting drug paraphernalia to be sold is a class 1 civil infraction.
  • Giving or permitting drug paraphernalia to be given — previously a class 1 civil infraction — is no longer prohibited.
  • Using drug paraphernalia continues to be a misdemeanor. See RCW 69.50.412(1).
  • Littering or dumping drug paraphernalia continues to be either a civil infraction, a misdemeanor, or a gross misdemeanor, depending on the quantity. See RCW 70A.200.060.

Notably, the definition of drug paraphernalia does not include cannabis-related paraphernalia or drug testing and analyzing equipment. Also, prohibitions on drug paraphernalia do not apply to distribution or use of public health supplies through pharmacies, public health programs, or other authorized community programs.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ORDINANCES

Many Washington cities and counties have passed ordinances regulating drug possession and use in the absence of permanent state legislation. Those ordinances no longer have any real effect because the state fully occupies and preempts the entire field of setting penalties for violations of the controlled substances act, and local ordinances must be consistent with chapter 69.50 RCW — see RCW 69.50.608. As described in the previous blog section, the state also preempts the field of drug paraphernalia regulation.

However, despite this state preemption, cities must adopt or incorporate state statutes into their municipal code in order to prosecute misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor cases in city municipal court — See City of Auburn v. Gauntt, 174 Wn.2d 321, 274 P.3d 1033 (2012), which held that cities with a municipal court created under chapter 3.50 RCW must prosecute misdemeanors and gross misdemeanors based on city code provisions or RCWs that have been incorporated into the code by reference.

DIVERSION PROGRAMS

The bill creates a pretrial diversion program for individuals charged with simple possession, where the defendant agrees to meaningfully engage in a treatment program in exchange for the state dismissing the charge. The judge must advise the defendant of a program’s availability at arraignment and the prosecuting attorney must consent to the defendant’s participation. Section 9 of the bill outlines all the details, and the Association of Washington Cities (AWC) article, Blake fix bill passes Legislature during one-day special session, provides additional information about the practicality of pre-trial diversion programs.

TREATMENT FACILITIES

Opioid use disorder treatment facilities (with the exception of safe injection sites) are now considered essential public facilities (EPFs). As such, cities and counties can only regulate opioid use disorder treatment facilities in the same manner in which they regulate other EPFs and health care settings. Maximum capacity cannot be imposed on these facilities. See Section 12 of the bill.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

WA Courts Reimburse Defendants For Fines & Costs Associated With Drug Convictions

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Washington Supreme Court, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Washington Spends $100 Million To Vacate 350,000 Marijuana/Drug Convictions And Reimburse People Criminalized By Unconstitutional Law - Marijuana Moment

In a press release, WA Courts will reimburse defendants for fines or costs paid in connection with drug possession convictions that were found unconstitutional by the Washington Supreme Court.

If you made payments towards legal financial obligations (LFOs) owed in cases vacated as a result of the State v. Blake decision, you may be eligible for a refund. Refunds of LFOs previously paid are ordered when the only conviction(s) in the case are for drug possession. If there are other charges in the case, refunds will be processed on any paid fines or fees specifically related to the possession of controlled substance charge.

Development of the Blake Refund Bureau, which will operate through an online portal, is led by the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) in collaboration with local courts and county clerks, public defenders, prosecutors, impacted individuals, advocacy groups and other stakeholders.

“The intent is to have a process that is easy to navigate and will provide for a timely response for individuals to receive their refunds . . . The public will be able to search for their cases by their name or case number.” ~AOC Blake Implementation Manager Sharon Swanson.

In the landmark State vs Blake decision issued on February 25, 2021, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that the state’s drug possession law was unconstitutional and void because it did not require individuals to have knowledge of the drug possession. As a result, those convicted of drug possession on or before February 25, 2021 became eligible to have their convictions vacated and removed from their criminal record, and their paid court-ordered fines and costs — called legal financial obligations (LFOs) — reimbursed.

It is estimated that over 200,000 felony drug possession charges dating back to the 1970s may be eligible to be vacated in superior courts. An estimated additional 150,000 misdemeanor marijuana charges may also be eligible for vacation. To help offset costs to courts, prosecutors, and defense attorneys, the Washington State legislature approved $47 million for the efforts of vacating hundreds of thousands of possession charges, and adjusting sentences for thousands of incarcerated or supervised persons.

An additional $50 million dollars was set aside to reimburse individuals who paid LFOs as a result of the Blake related convictions. AOC was appointed to lead the work, including establishing a Blake Refund Bureau to administer LFO refunds to impacted individuals.

The Blake Refund Bureau portal will be accessible to the public via a link on www.courts.wa.gov. The refund bureau will provide individuals who have had their Blake convictions vacated a self-navigable database to determine if they have refunds related to their convictions. Refund requests will be submitted through an online application. Once the application has been received and an amount of refund is confirmed by the court, a refund will be issued.

While the portal exclusively operates in the processing of LFO refunds, the site will include resources to guide individuals in clearing their convictions and seeking legal help.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Drivers Can’t Consent to Police Searching a Passenger’s Belongings

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, felony, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Search and Seizure, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Washington Court of Appeals, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Should Cops Be Allowed to Rip Up Your Stuff While Looking for Drugs? | The New Republic

In State v. Garner, No. 56861-6-II (2023), the WA Court of Appeals held that a driver’s consent to search their car does not extend to searching the contents of closed containers inside the car that do not belong to the driver.

BACKGROUND FACTS

A police officer arrested Mr. Garner on an outstanding warrant after stopping a car and encountering Garner as a passenger. Garner tried to flee on foot but the officer apprehended him. After placing Garner under arrest, the officer spoke with the car’s driver, who said Garner left three backpacks behind in her car. The officer asked the driver for permission to search the car and she granted it.

The officer then searched Garner’s backpacks without requesting his permission and found controlled substances. Later testing established that the controlled substances found in the backpacks were 86.9 grams of methamphetamine and 3.8 grams of heroin.

The State charged Garner with two counts of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. Before trial, Garner moved to suppress evidence obtained from the warrantless search of his backpacks. The trial court denied Garner’s suppression motion. After a bench trial, the trial court found Garner guilty of both counts of possession with intent to deliver.

On appeal, Mr. Garner argued that the trial court improperly denied his suppression motion.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

In short, the WA Court of Appeals held that the trial court should have granted Garner’s suppression motion. It reasoned that a person’s bag or closed container heightened protection under the federal and state constitutions. It emphasized that the Washington Supreme Court has also recognized an expectation of privacy in purses, briefcases, and other traditional containers of personal belongings.

Here, the defendant passenger had a legitimate expectation of privacy in the backpacks he left inside the car when he fled from the police during a traffic stop.  He did not abandon the backpacks or relinquish his privacy interest in them because he was in the vehicle with permission, and took steps to conceal the backpacks from the officer before fleeing.

The Court of Appeals also reasoned that that the driver’s consent to search her car did not extend to Garner’s backpacks.

“Garner had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his backpacks. And while Washington case law does not squarely address whether a passenger has a reasonable expectation of privacy in items left in another’s car, our cases point to the conclusion that Garner did not relinquish his expectation of privacy when he left his backpacks in the driver’s car. Unlike the defendant in Samalia, Garner did not leave his backpacks in a stolen car. He left them in a car he had occupied with the driver’s permission.”

“And unlike the defendant in Reynolds, he did not remove the backpacks from the car and leave them on the road. Rather, Garner, who lacked housing, left his belongings with a person he knew. Moreover, Garner never disclaimed ownership of the backpacks. He took the time to put two of the backpacks on the vehicle’s rear floorboard and tried stowing the third backpack under the driver’s seat. The circumstances lend themselves to the conclusion that he intended to safeguard the backpacks until he could recover them.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

With that, the Court of Appeals reversed Garner’s convictions because the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. This is especially true if Search and Seizure issues are involved. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Washington State Ranked 23rd In The Nation For Drug Use

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Studies, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Cities begin forming drug possession laws after Washington bill failed to pass legislature | KOMO

Insightful article in The Center Square by journalist Brett Davis shows reveals Washington ranks at No. 23 in the nation for drug use. The article follows on the heels of a WalletHub study.

To compile its rankings, WalletHub compared all 50 states and the District of Columbia across 21 key metrics, including arrests, overdose rates, opioid prescriptions, and employee drug testing laws.

Washington came in at No. 3 – just behind Vermont and Oregon, respectively – in terms of the highest percentage of adult drug users. The Evergreen State also took the No. 3 ranking, behind Oregon and Colorado, in terms of the highest percentage of adults with unmet drug-treatment needs.

Per WalletHub’s report, Washington ranked 51st in the nation – dead last – with the fewest people receiving substance abuse treatment per 1,000 drug users.

It wasn’t all bad news for Washington, however, which accounts for the state’s overall in-between ranking.

“Washington ranks in the middle of the pack in terms of drug use . . . On the downside, the state has a large share of adults who used illicit drugs in the past month, almost 22%, and does not consider substance abuse during pregnancy a crime. It also has the third largest share of adults who couldn’t get treatment for illicit drug use in the past year, 8.5%.” ~WalletHub analyst Jill Gonzalez

WalletHub’s study notes America’s war against drug abuse has “a long and storied history in the United States.

“Yet despite the country’s best efforts to fight it, the problem is getting worse, and is exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic,” the report states. “There were over 100,000 drug overdose deaths in the 12-month period ending in April 2021, up 28.5% from the previous year. It’s crucial for the government to address this issue and prevent it from getting any worse.”

The top 10 states and state designates in terms of drug use:

1. West Virginia

2. District of Columbia

3. Arkansas

4. Missouri

5. New Mexico

6. Nevada

7. Colorado

8. Michigan

9. Oregon

10. Tennessee

The bottom 10 states in terms of drug use:

51. Minnesota

50. Hawaii

49. Utah

48. Idaho

47. Iowa

46. North Dakota

45. Nebraska

44. Virginia

43. South Dakota

42. Georgia

Dozens of cities in Washington state are considering new bans on possession or public use of illegal drugs. That’s after state legislators failed to reach an agreement on a new drug law in the final hours of the 2023 legislative session.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Skagit County’s Drug Task Force May Lose Funding

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Task forces seize over $29 million in narcotics in Ohio this year | WRGT

Great article in GoSkagit by journalist Brandon Stone reports that the WA Commerce Department may stop funding Skagit County’s drug enforcement squad. This puts the future of this unit at risk.

THE SKAGIT COUNTY DRUG TASK FORCE

The Skagit County Drug Task Force is a “vice” unit composed of police officers from all of Skagit County’s law enforcement agencies. The Task Force is responsible for gathering intelligence on illegal drug activity in and through Skagit County. They conduct investigations, make arrests and conduct seizures based on that intelligence. They also shut down drug houses, intercept deliveries, and assist in the prosecution of high-profile drug dealers.

Each member of the Drug Task Force has years of experience in law enforcement. The Task Force has assembled a wide range of informants providing them with a constant flow of information.

FUNDING PROBLEMS

Tobin Meyer, the commander of the Task Force, recently addressed the Mount Vernon City Council. He discussed the funding issues and asked if the City would offer support if State funding stopped. He said of the unit’s $450,000 annual budget, $150,000 traditionally comes from this grant. Funding would usually come in September, but he can’t count on it this year.

“It’s a David and Goliath battle, but we’re doing our best.” ~Tobin Meyer, chief criminal deputy with the Skagit County Sheriff’s Office

INCREASE OF FENTANYL & “TRANQ”

Meyer discussed recent trends in drug trafficking. hE painted a dire picture of the prevalence of fentanyl in the county.

As recently as 2019, this highly concentrated opioid was rare. But by 2022, law enforcement took more than 300,000 pills off the street, Meyer said. A counterfeit Percocet pill containing fentanyl might have cost $20 to $30 wholesale in 2020, but today’s price is closer to a dollar.

A new drug called Xylazine, also called Tranq, was found in Skagit County after first being documented elsewhere in the country. Unlike opioids, there is no known overdose antidote to xylazine.

DRUG TRENDS IN WA STATE

Washington ranks third worst in the nation for illicit drug use disorder, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, released in December 2021. WA State ranks next to last in delivering drug treatment to adults and teens who say they need it. More than 2,000 people died of drug overdoses last year in Washington, a 66% jump since 2019.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

House of Representatives Fails to Pass Drug Possession Legislation

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Legislation, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Drug possession bill voted down last-minute in Washington state | king5.com

On Sunday, the House of Representatives rejected Senate Bill 5536. The legislation would have made the possession and use of hard drugs a gross misdemeanor. The bill failed in the final hours of the current session.

Senate Bill 5536 was introduced as a measure to significantly change drug possession laws. Many of the legislation’s original backers turned against it, citing concerns that the bill has been watered down and could cause more harm than good.

Governor Inslee responded to the results. He believed the bill was going to be the solution for a lot of drug problems in Washington. He also said he expects the legislature to draft another bill that will include pointing people to treatment services and not decriminalizing drugs.

If passed into law,Senate Bill 5536  would have superseded existing public drug use bans in cities like Kent and Bellingham. In addition, an officer would have had to simultaneously witness someone with drugs and using them to make an arrest. Democrats stood by the bill, while Republicans argued it would make things worse.

THE BLAKE DECISION.

On Feb. 25, 2021, the Washington Supreme Court issued a decision declaring the state’s main drug possession statute RCW 69.50.4013(1) unconstitutional and “void.” The ruling occurred in a case known as State v. Blake. In 2016, Shannon Blake was arrested in Spokane and convicted of simple drug possession. Blake argued that she did not know there was a baggie of methamphetamine in the jeans she had received from a friend.
The court ruled that the statute violated the due process clause of the constitution. Without any mental state requirement, the law criminalized “unknowing” drug possession and people could be arrested and convicted even if they did not realize they had drugs in their possession. The majority concluded, “The legislature’s police power goes far, but not that far.”
That case held that the state’s law making possession a felony was unconstitutional. The legislature instead classified possession as misdemeanor crimes, punishable by up to 90 days in jail, a $1,000 fine or both.
THE POLITICAL BATTLEGROUND

Numerous mayors from across Washington state, including Auburn Mayor Nancy Backus, agreed that something needs to be done about the rise in public drug use. However, they signed a letter stating that SB 5536 is not the solution. They argued that instead of helping to crack down on the drug crisis, the bill would add more limitations.

“We’re harming people more than we’re helping,” said Backus. “There’s no teeth to it, and it is also preemptive of any local jurisdiction. Yet, despite this vote, lawmakers on both sides are hoping to find a solution that works for everyone.

“I think the important part you are hearing on both sides, which is all together, is that we care. We care,” said Rep. Maycumber.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Hotel Room Hosts Can’t Consent To Police Searching Other Guest’s Bags

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Constitutional Rights, Drug Offenses, felony, Fourth Amendment, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Search and Seizure, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Single-use plastic bags will be banned in Colorado by 2024 with bag fees set to start in 2023 under new law

In State v. Giberson, No. 56081-0-II (April 4, 2023), the WA Court of Appeals held that the host of a hotel room lacks authority allowing police to search a guest’s grocery bags located inside the room.  A person has a reasonable privacy interest in grocery bags, which are are “traditional repositories of personal belongings.”

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In May of 2020, police received a tip from a confidential informant that Mr. Giberson planned a drug deal at a nearby motel. Police journeyed to the motel. They conducted surveillance of room #106. Police contacted a person named Mr. Goedker after Goedker departed room #106.

Goedker stated that he was the sole occupant of motel room #106. He said he had been residing there for approximately 10 days. He stated that the defendant Mr. Giberson had stopped by earlier that day. Giberson and a person named Ms. Hopkins remained in the room. Goedker said that there were bags in the motel room belonging to Giberson.

Police opened the door to Room #106. They saw Giberson and an associate sitting at a table. Both Giberson and the associate were detained and removed from the room.

The detectives then searched two plastic grocery bags on the floor next to the door. Inside one of the grocery bags they found a digital scale and two baggies containing heroin.  After searching the bags, police asked Goedker if they belonged to him. Goedker denied ownership and stated that the bags belonged to Giberson.

The State charged Giberson with possession of heroin with the intent to deliver. Before trial, Giberson moved to suppress the evidence found in the warrantless search of the plastic grocery bags. The trial court denied the suppression motion. It reasoned that Gibson lacked standing to challenge the search of his bags. Ultimately, the court also found Giberson guilty as charged. Giberson appealed his conviction. He argued that the search of his grocery bags was unlawful because Goedker could not give consent to search his possessions.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

First, the Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether Giberson had standing to challenge the search of his bags.

“A defendant has automatic standing under article I, section 7 of the Washington State Constitution to challenge a search when (1) possession is an essential element of the charged offense and (2) the defendant was in possession of the item searched at the time of the challenged search,” said the Court. Here, Giberson has automatic standing to challenge the search. Consequently, the trial court erred in concluding that Giberson did not have standing.

Next, the Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether the search of Gibson’s bags was lawful.

The Court reasoned that warrantless searches are unlawful under the Washington Constitution and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Valid consent is an exception allowing for a warrantless search. However, consent to search an area does not necessarily provide authorization to search belongings of a third person inside the area. Here, Goedker did not own, possess, or control Giberson’s grocery bags. Therefore, Goedker did not have authority to consent to the search of Giberson’s bags.

The Court of Appeals further reasoned that a search is unconstitutional if the defendant had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the item searched.  Here, Giberson clearly sought to preserve as private the drugs and digital scale by placing them in his grocery bag. The Court addressed whether Giberson had a privacy interest in storing his belongngs in plastic bags:

“Grocery bags can be characterized as ‘traditional repositories of personal belongings.” People certainly put personal grocery items and other personal items obtained in a grocery store like prescription medications in such bags. And common experience tells us that people also use grocery bags to carry other personal items. For example, this may be true for people such as those experiencing homelessness who may not have space for their personal items. Giberson reasonably could expect that others would not search his grocery bags without his consent. Therefore, we conclude that Giberson had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his grocery bags.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

With that, the Court of Appeals concluded that Goedker’s authority to give consent to search his hotel room did not extend to the search of Giberson’s grocery bags. Furthermore, Giberson had a reasonable expectation of privacy in those bags. Therefore, the trial court erred in failing to suppress the heroin and digital scale found in the search of the grocery bags. Giberson’s conviction was reversed.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime involving Search and Seizure. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Bellingham City Council Rejects Proposal to Ban Public Drug Use

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Uncategorized, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , ,

In NYC's overdose crisis, public health approach focuses on correcting pandemic-related disruptions – Bronx Times

The Bellingham City Council has rejected a proposal that would make public drug use a crime. The ordinance would have made the use of a controlled substance in a public place a misdemeanor. Misdemeanors are punishable by a maximum sentence of 90 days in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000.

By state law, drug possession is only a misdemeanor on an offender’s third arrest for the crime. On the first two arrests, police are required to refer offenders to drug treatment programs.

The City of Marysville was able to pass two similar city ordinances preventing public drug use late last year. The first ordinance prohibits the use of controlled substances in public without a prescription. The second ordinance will further prohibit inappropriate behavior aboard transit, at park-and-ride lots, or at bus stops.

The city has been grappling with open drug use of fentanyl and other narcotics. Businesses have complained about the impact.

Mayor Seth Fleetwood hoped that his proposals would be the start of improving conditions downtown:

“These actions are the next step in a multi-year focus on downtown, where public health and safety concerns continue despite nearly one million dollars in investments in security personnel, downtown ambassadors, graffiti abatement, sanitation and other services last year and continuing this year.” ~City of Bellingham Mayor Seth Fleetwood.

Apparently, Bellingham police responded to 87 overdose calls this year. That compares to 70 overdose calls in all of 2022. Council members argued that it wasn’t so much they were against the proposal, it was that they did not see an adequate plan to deal with people after they were arrested. Councilmember Hannah Stone was among those who voted against the ordinance.

“If we don’t have a therapeutic court and other options in place at this time, then further criminalizing or trying to arrest our way out of addiction is just insane.” ~Hannah Stone, City of Bellingham Councilmember.

Currently, police can not even tell drug users that using drugs in public is illegal.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Justice Department Announces Application Form for Marijuana Pardon Certificates

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Federal Crimes & Prosecutions, marijuana, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

NORML Op-ed: President Biden: What Happened to Those Marijuana Pardons You Promised? - NORML

The DOJ is launching an application for eligible individuals to receive certificate of proof that they were pardoned by President Biden.

On October 6, President Biden announced a full, unconditional and categorical pardon for prior federal and D.C. offenses of simple possession of marijuana. President Biden’s pardon lifts barriers to housing, employment and educational opportunities for thousands of people with those prior convictions.

President Biden directed the Justice Department to develop a process for individuals to receive their certificate of pardon.

The online application will be available on the Office of the Pardon Attorney’s website: Application for Certificate of Pardon. The web form allows eligible persons to submit documentation to the Office of the Pardon Attorney and receive a certificate indicating the person was pardoned on Oct. 6, 2022, for simple possession of marijuana.

The President’s pardon may assist pardoned persons by removing civil or legal disabilities that are imposed because of the pardoned conviction. These included restrictions on the right to vote, to hold office or to sit on a jury. The application released today may also be helpful as proof of pardon for those who seek to obtain licenses, bonding or employment. As President Biden said at the time of the proclamation, his action intends to “help relieve the consequences arising from these convictions.”

Those who were pardoned on Oct. 6, 2022, are eligible for a certificate of pardon. Consistent with the proclamation, to be eligible for a certificate, an applicant must have been charged or convicted of simple possession of marijuana in either a federal court or D.C. Superior Court, and the applicant must have been lawfully within the United States at the time of the offense. Similarly, an individual must have been a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident on Oct. 6, 2022.

Those who were convicted of state marijuana offenses do not qualify for the pardon.

The department is committed to carefully and expeditiously reviewing the applications and issuing certificates to those pardoned under the proclamation. For more information regarding eligibility and answers to frequently asked questions, please visit Presidential Proclamation on Marijuana Possession.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

“Tranq”: The Skin-Rotting Street Drug Infiltrating Big Cities

Bellingham Defense Attorney, Drug Offenses, Mount Vernon Criminal Defense Attorney, Skagit County Criminal Defense, Whatcom County Criminal Defense, , , , ,

Skin-rotting drug 'tranq' infiltrates big cities: 'Zombifying bodies'

Journalist Brooke Kato reports in the New York Post that Xylazineis wreaking havoc in major cities across the country with its devastating effects.  Otherwise known as “Tranq,” it can literally rot the user’s skin.

The substance, which seemed to first appear in Philadelphia before migrating west to San Francisco and Los Angeles, was used for cutting heroin. Most recently, it has been discovered in fentanyl and other illicit drugs. While approved by the Food and Drug Administration for veterinary use, Xylazine, a non-opioid, is not safe for humans. Those who overdose on the drug do not respond to naloxone, or Narcan, the most common overdose reversal treatment.

Xylazine causes sedative-like symptoms, such as excessive sleepiness and respiratory depression. It also causes and inflames raw wounds that can become severe and spread rapidly with repeated exposure. The crusty ulcerations, which can become dead skin called eschar, can result in amputation if left untreated. Because it is not listed as a controlled substance for animals or humans, “tranq” lands in a confusing and horrifying gray area — and hospitals rarely test for it with routine toxicology screenings.

The city of Philadelphia reported that 90% of lab-tested dope samples from 2021 contained xylazine, which can increase the risk of overdose when combined with other illicit substances.

But the lethal combination of substances is what gives xylazine its appeal — the high of the opioid, such as fentanyl, is extended with the help of “tranq.” People with substance use disorders who get hooked on the zombifying drug believe the emerging substance killed “any kind of joy” that came with getting high. The worrying “tranq” trend comes as the New York City Department of Health reported that 2,668 New Yorkers died of overdoses in 2021. Experts warn that xylazine could worsen the ongoing drug epidemic.

According to a 2022 report, xylazine has been discovered in 36 states. In New York City alone, the drug was found in 25% of samples, per the Times. Earlier this month, the San Francisco Department of Health announced that low levels of xylazine were found in the systems of four people who overdosed, suggesting that the substance can be hidden in drugs unbeknownst to the users.

The pressures from life are real. Building careers, buying homes, getting married, having kids, and trying to do it all well comes with lots of pressure. COVID-19 has magnified the stress. Some turn to drugs to cope. However, just because some drugs are legal to possess doesn’t mean they are less dangerous.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.