Indictments

[MELISSA A SMITH]

Jurisdiction

Texas

The indictment shows the crime charged as: possession of controlled substance with intent to deliver, to-wit: methamphetamine (habitual)
If the DA strikes 2 of the charges listed and this takes away the habitual... don't they have to get another indictment due to the fact that habitual is listed as a charging term

 

[army judge]

possession of controlled substance with intent to deliver, to-wit: methamphetamine (habitual)

You misunderstand what habitual means in our statute.

Any prior illegal drug history in any state (not just Texas) is enough to allow the prosecutor to enhance your charges as " habitual" and bring about a much harsher sentence UPON conviction.

However, a charge is NOT a conviction.
A criminal indictment is but the first start on the criminal justice journey to justice.

If the DA strikes 2 of the charges listed and this takes away the habitual... don't they have to get another indictment due to the fact that habitual is listed as a charging term

No.

The prosecutor is free to allow a defendant to cop a plea, or make a motion for the court to drop a charge.

Bear in mind, some prosecutors will even issue a "superseding" indictment, which is very common in the federal courts.

 

[MELISSA A SMITH]

Police officer pulls me over for expired tags.
I tell him they are good and he should look again.
Officer looks and agrees that they are good.
I ask for my license back and officer tells me that he needs to run my license through computer.
The REAL truth was that the officer was asked by drug enforcement unit to DETAIN me untill they could get there with search warrant.
Doesn't this serve as a illegal seizure, since I should have been free to go when officer saw that reg was good.
Shouldn't he have just told me that a search warrant was on the way.
Shouldn't the evidence found with search warrant be squashed

No motion
The charges struck were not mine
Habitual is part of charging terms
I was told information can be changed...indictments cannot

 

[army judge]

Doesn't this serve as a illegal seizure, since I should have been free to go when officer saw that reg was good.

No.

I suggest you speak about this ONLY with your attorney.

If you speak with the police, you aren't allowed to LIE.

If the police speak to you, THEY are allowed to lie.

Use your RIGHT to remain silent, and speak ONLY with your attorney.

If a drug task force is all up in your POO-POO, you're also being watched and monitored.

Your ONLY privileged communication is with YOUR attorney, not just an attorney, but YOUR attorney.

Why do organized crime figures not get convicted as much as street corner thugs?

They keep their mouths shut!

Doesn't this serve as a illegal seizure, since I should have been free to go when officer saw that reg was good.

Again, NO.

There is no easy way out of the mess in which you've been ensnared.

There MIGHT be a way out if you retain a good lawyer and keep your yapper shut, as well as staying off of the internet, telephone, and avoid text messaging.

Trust me, the drug police are watching and listening 24/7/365.

They don't want you.

They want Mr BIG and MS BIGGER!

 

[MELISSA A SMITH]

Except a superseding one can't be done...the statute of limitations is UP

 

[army judge]

Except a superseding one can't be done...the statute of limitations is UP

Then you (or someone else) has nothing to fret over.

Life is easy when you obey all of their laws.