Ok, I've been out on bail for a year with the stipulation that I remain clean. There were no urine tests being taken and I was sure I was getting jail time for my offense so I lived life to the fullest. When my trial date came I lucked out and copped to a 2 year suspended sentence with ramifications up the wazoo. My first meeting with my P.O. is Monday (4 days after trial) and she stated that I would have to provide a urine at that time which will no doubt be dirty. I haven't done anything since the trial date and think I should be given a little time for my system to clean itself out... do I have a leg to stand on here? And what should I do?

Any and all help would be greatly appreciated!

You were given the stipulation to remain clean and you didn't. Guess it's time to pay the piper and learn your lesson.

What makes you even think you have a leg to stand on?

Stay clean and provide the urine test when specified. You can't do anything else like 'buy time' or that will send up massive red flags to your probation officer.

What else did you expect us to say ?

I know but I haven't done anything since BEING sentenced, and I plan to follow all the stipulations to a T. Shouldn't there be a small window before being slammed with a urine just several days later?

Ok, I've been out on bail for a year with the stipulation that I remain clean.

Guess you should have remained clean then huh?

IShouldn't there be a small window before being slammed with a urine just several days later?

You mean like 365 days?

Dude, you got busted, you were told to stay clean and you didn't. You're screwed. You didn't learn your lesson did you?

Shouldn't there be a small window before being slammed with a urine just several days later?Hello D:

There SHOULD be, but that doesn't mean there will be... It's a good argument. I'd keep making it.

excon

Guess you should have remained clean then huh?Tough crowd here.:eek: The difference (at least there SHOULD be a difference) is that the stipulation that I violated was for remaining out on bail (which is now over and I already got my money back.) The SENTENCE which commenced yesterday said no usage (which there hasn't been) and there won't be... makes sense, doesn't it?

I'm in Massachusetts by the way, if that makes a difference.

Hello D:

There SHOULD be, but that doesn't mean there will be... It's a good argument. I'd keep making it.

exconWhat do you think my odds are?

makes sense, doesn't it?Hello again, D:

Yes, and I'd KEEP using it... I think YOU have them down, but there are a few distinctions at work here... Before you were supervised by the probation department, you were supervised by the court. The COURT supervision says NOTHING about getting high AFTER you've been released. The probation supervision says NOTHING about getting high BEFORE you were put on probation. Therefore, you did NOT violate your probation.

I fondly remember a situation I was involved in... I was in a half way house STILL under the supervision of the Department of Corrections... I wasn't allowed to visit my old partner, but I did anyway. The cops were watching him and saw me with him..

Then I got OUT of the half way house and was put under supervision by the probation department... The fu**ing cops called me up and threatened to VIOLATE my supervision because I visited my friend... But, of course, THAT supervision had ended with NO violations, and a new one started. I certainly hadn't violated the new one...

I have to tell you, it gave me GREAT pleasure to tell that cop to go to hell.

excon

You see, you were told BEFORE you were sentenced to stay clean and you didn't. The court has the authority to test you immediately after sentencing if they so please. Had you followed instructions prior to sentencing you wouldn't have to worry, but you didn't.

You made the choice to live "life to the fullest" after you were told to "remain clean," and now you have to suffer the consequences to your actions.

Had you followed directions you wouldn't be in this position.

Thanks for the advice guys (even the [I]sobering[I] viewpoint from J_9.) Guess I'll play my hand on Monday see where the cards fall. Hopefully I'll be back to report a positive outcome!

Tough crowd here.:eek: The difference (at least there SHOULD be a difference) is that the stipulation that I violated was for remaining out on bail (which is now over and I already got my money back.) The SENTENCE which commenced yesterday said no usage (which there hasn't been) and there won't be... makes sense, doesn't it?

Yes, I get it actually. You haven't violated the conditions of the sentence and, although you admittedly violated the conditions of bail, the bail has been exonerated. The penalty for violation of bail should be considered separately. If your UA comes up dirty, make the argument. It couldn't hurt to try, I guess.

Arguably, the remedy for violation of bail would be an exclusive remedy (keeping the bail amount), and would not include revoking probation after conviction.

One problem I can see is that you may not be able to prove that a dirty UA indicates whether the drug use was before or after the sentencing.


... The COURT supervision says NOTHING about getting high AFTER you've been released. ...

I don't quite follow that part. Released on bail? Sure it does.

Or do you mean released from bail? The judge said "Defendant is released from bail, and sentenced to two years probation." The "window" of opportunity would be about as long as the judge took to say that comma between "bail" and "and sentenced". :)

One problem I can see is that you may not be able to prove that a dirty UA indicates whether the drug use was before or after the sentencing.Hello again, lawyer:

It's worse than that... In the first place, proof is NOT a factor in probation violations. Suspicion is good enough...

Plus, the PO COULD say, and I've seen 'em do it, that it doesn't matter WHEN the drug was consumed... It only matters that he POSSESSES it NOW, within his tissues... That's a violation...

I'd STILL make the argument, though.

excon

...
It's worse than that... In the first place, proof is NOT a factor in probation violations. Suspicion is good enough...
...

I understand that (except that if the PO asks the court to revoke probation there is some "burden of proof" - the judge is going to have to find that he violated the conditions). But what I'm saying is that even if the PO is sympathetic to his argument, she could say "Yes, ok, but assuming it makes a difference, how do I know you didn't take the drug yesterday?"

What do you think, excon, should he be above-board and admit it before doing the UA?

Wrote something, missed second page, no longer relevant, don't know how to delete, sorry.

except that if the PO asks the court to revoke probation there is some "burden of proof" - the judge is going to have to find that he violated the conditions. What do you think, Excon, should he be above-board and admit it before doing the UA?Hello again, lawyer:

The PO would NEVER ask the court to violate his prior supervision, when she could just violate the present supervision a whole lot easier. That is, if she has a mind to violate him at all.

He's going to be found out anyway... Arguing that he got high BEFORE he was on HER probation is the ONLY argument he has.

excon

That almost answers my other question. Should I try to garner a little support/sympathy beforehand by saying my urine may be dirty and this is why? Or should I wait for the results and try to if and & but my way out of it then?

Should I try to garner a little support/sympathy beforehand by saying my urine may be dirty and this is why? Hello again, D:

There AIN'T no sympathy or support... There's only COPS and PO'S wanting to bust you. You don't like them. They don't like you.

This is simply a matter of whether she THINKS she can sustain a violation or not. Your ONLY hope is to let her know that she MIGHT get a decent argument out of you in front of a judge.

excon

That almost answers my other question. Should I try to garner a little support/sympathy beforehand by saying my urine may be dirty and this is why? Or should I wait for the results and try to if and & but my way out of it then?

And as I understand excon's reply to my earlier question, I think he is saying the former: tell her from the get-go.

Good luck. What time is the meeting? Let us know how it went.

Damn... I go at 2pm on Monday. Do you think it would matter that I'm a single parent of a 9 year old boy that would be in school that day with no one to pick him up if violated?

Damn... I go at 2pm on Monday. Do you think it would matter that I'm a single parent of a 9 year old boy that would be in school that day with no one to pick him up if violated?Hello again, D:

NO!! If they gave a sh*t, the prisons would be EMPTY. In fact, we are the worlds LARGEST jailer. We have MORE prisoners that CHINA who has 4 BILLION people and are supposed to be the nasty ones...

Nope. They WANT to bust you! They don't care about your kids. They care about their CAREERS. It goes on their record and that'll help 'em get promoted... Realize WHO you're dealing with here. They AIN'T nice.

excon

Whelp, I guess that's that. I'll keep the boy out of school that day and hope for the best. Like I said, hope to be able to report back on Monday, ha ha... thanks again!

Whelp, I guess that's that. I'll keep the boy outta school that day and hope for the best.Hello again, D:

Well, it DOES take a few days for the test results. Even IF/WHEN you're dirty, she may NOT violate you, or if she does, she may NOT arrest you. I don't know what she'll do. What are we talking about here? Pot?? Heroin?? It makes a difference.

excon

Hello again, D:

Well, it DOES take a few days for the test results. Even IF/WHEN you're dirty, she may NOT violate you, or if she does, she may NOT arrest you. I dunno what she'll do. What are we talking about here? Pot??? Heroin??? It makes a difference.

exconOh, so it isn't an instant thing? Yeah, it would be just pot and alcohol (I drank almost a fifth of Jim Bean every night for quite awhile so I'm sure it would be stored in my fat for some time, or so I've been told.) Think 4 days is enough time?

Hello again, D:

You said the court ordered you to be "clean". Unless alcohol was specifically included, drinking is legal. So, if it's JUST pot, and you admit it first, unless she's a TOTAL jerk, I can't imagine her violating you - or even if she does, I DOUBT she'll put you in jail to await your hearing, and I can't imagine the judge sentencing you to jail for the violation...

Now, as I said before, lots of them ARE total jerks.

excon

Hello again, D:

You said the court ordered you to be "clean". Unless alcohol was specifically included, drinking is legal. So, if it's JUST pot, and you admit it first, unless she's a TOTAL jerk, I can't imagine her violating you - or even if she does, I DOUBT she'll put you in jail to await your hearing, and I can't imagine the judge sentencing you to jail for the violation...

Now, as I said before, lots of them ARE total jerks.

exconAlcohol was included and she seems like a TOTAL *******. :(

Alcohol was included and she seems like a TOTAL *******. :(Hello again, D:

I changed my mind. Admit nothing. Smile. Be friendly. Don't tell her sh*t.

excon

Hello again, D:

I changed my mind. Admit nothing. Smile. Be friendly. Don't tell her sh*t.

exconHa ha, will do, and thanks again!

Hello again, D:

I changed my mind. Admit nothing. Smile. Be friendly. Don't tell her sh*t.

excon

Ok. Back to the drawing board.

Let's look at the forensics of the issue then.

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine_testing#Urine_drug_screen) suggests to me that the bourbon won't show 4 days after consumption, and the cannabis is borderline.

Wait a minute here. I just noticed something:


... When my trial date came I lucked out ... My first meeting with my P.O. is Monday (4 days after trial) ... I haven't done anything since the trial date and ...

Today is Friday. Monday is four days from today. Are you saying the trial date was today? Very short trial, apparently, since your first post was 8:24 a.m. Central Time.

Wait a minute here. I just noticed something:



Today is Friday. Monday is four days from today. Are you saying the trial date was today? Very short trial, apparently, since your first post was 8:24 a.m., Central Time.My trial was Thursday, I see the PO Monday... 4 days.

There is a window, it is called "bail" from the time you were arrested, you should have stopped doing anything illegal. Remember under the laws using pot is illegal, some only a misdemeanor but still a crime, and you could have been arrested with a new crime. Of course drinking is not illegal.

As noted, unless they do a test with hair, the drinking will not show up. But the pot will. Since you are not suppose to be using drugs, that means you were still breaking the law after being arrested for something.

Normally they will give you a serious warning and more frequent testing if you fail a test but again, they may want to prove the point and violate you on the first meeting, to make you sit in jail a bit, but the judge would normally just put you back on probation.

Expect the PO to read you a riot act, talk to you like a dog and try and get you to go off.

Ok, get this. I answer a knock at the door at 10:30 this a.m. to find my PO standing there with a cop. I ask what's the problem, it's not 2pm yet. She says to me "you were supposed to be there at 10am, you missed your first appointment." It clearly states on my court papers 2pm but what ever. They escort me down to the court and give me a bunch of **** to sign, read me the riot act, tell me I have to submit a DNA sample because of the nature of the crime (AB w/DW) and then came the Urine test. Now mind you, I went out to GNC yesterday and picked up this thing called "QCARBO32" that's supposed to give a 100% guarantee of a clean system. I don't know if it was really that, but I smoked some high grade trees just 4 days ago and I came back clean today!! THANK THE DEAR LORD!

And thanks to all you folks that talked me down off the roof, ha ha... it's time to rebuild my life again, and without pollutants this time.

Hello again, D:

They gave you the results already?? Cool.

excon

Hello again, D:

They gave you the results already??? Cool.

exconYeah, I went in the bathroom with the CO and gave him a sample. He says to go wait out in the lobby, he came back out and told the PO it was clean. Was it a stick test or something? My PO asked him what the numbers were and he said that he didn't do numbers. Any idea what that might have meant? And should I be giving a DNA sample for an assault charge? I'm not a rapist!

... I came back clean today!!! THANK THE DEAR LORD!
...
Yes, He was looking out for you, wasn't He?
Good for you.


... it's time to rebuild my life again, and without pollutants this time.

Amen.


And should I be giving a DNA sample for an assault charge? I'm not a rapist!!

I don't think there are any definitive rules limiting when they can collect DNA samples. But keep in mind, it's possible to leave DNA trace evidence in many assault-type offenses, not just a sexual offense.

That makes sense... thanks, AK lawyer!

And should I be giving a DNA sample for an assault charge? I'm not a rapist!!Hello again, D:

If they can require you to produce urine on demand, then they can require you to produce spit.

excon

Hello again, D:

If they can require you to produce urine on demand, then they can require you to produce spit.

excon

They can require him to produce something else too, in a little cup and it isn't urine.

Tick