Bathtub Molly: Designer Drugs and the Legality Thereof

Meow Meow is not your friend.  Neither is any other designer drug that someone engineers, mixes up in a juiced-up home chemistry set and sells on the internet. 

This is going to sound absurd and/or repulsive to a lot of you.  Just bear with me.  You may at least find this interesting.  Kind of like watching a show about cannibalism on the History Channel.  You know you aren’t ever going to dabble in the subject, but you can’t stop watching.

Every once in a while someone (often a teenager with too much chemistry knowledge and not enough sense) manufactures a new drug that cannot be detected by existing drug tests.  The drug becomes popular, it may or may not kill a few people, and then states (and possibly the federal government) begin to ban it.  Some are extremely dangerous and some are relatively benign.  Occasionally, a drug will reach a level of…um…legitimacy(?), I suppose – such that the designer drug is packaged for resale and distributed freely on the open market. 

Take “Spice” for example.  “Spice” is the trademarked name of a company that distributed a synthetic cannabinoid (although the name “Spice” has been generalized to the extent that people use it to refer to all synthetic cannabis products, much like “Band-Aid” or “Kleenex”).  This synthetic cannabis product was packaged in a little shiny pouch with a flashy logo, and was sold in gas stations until banned Nationwide in March of 2011.  I haven’t found any research that suggests that Spice causes any more negative side effects than actual pot (except that some research suggests that it may make people nauseous) but the concern is that a lot of research just doesn’t exist.  The Associated Press indicated earlier this year that no official studies have been conducted on Spice’s effects on humans.

And that’s the problem.  We really have no idea what the short or long-term consequences of ingesting these drugs are, or will be.  People are just buying these drugs off the internet, or from some guy down the street and shoving them into their body, with no idea of what sort of harm might befall them.  If you are wondering why people wouldn’t weigh the possible consequences of drug use against the desire to get a little buzz, you are injecting a level of logic that simply isn’t present when people buy designer drugs.

More recently, “bath salts” have been the designer drug of choice.  The scientific name for the synthetic stimulant is mephedrone or methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV).  It comes in tablet or powder forms and users swallow, snort, or inject the drug into their bloodstream. The reported effects of mephedrone are very similar to those caused by cocaine and MDMA.  According to the DEA’s Drug and Chemical Evaluation of methylenedioxypyrovalerone, that means the drug causes feelings of empathy, stimulation, alertness, euphoria, and awareness of senses.  On the negative side, it can cause tachycardia, hypertension, vasoconstriction, and sweating.  MDPV has also been reported to cause intense, prolonged panic attacks in users.  Repeat users have reported bouts of psychosis and a craving or a strong desire or urge to use again. 

Users have been able to get the drug through internet purchases, or from street pharmacists.  The "street names" for mephedrone or MDPV bath salts are numerous.  They include but are not limited to Meow Meow, Kat, White Knight,  White Rush, Ivory Snow, Vanilla Sky, Plant Fertilizer, Energy-1, and Arctic Blast.*  

In 2011, the CDC conducted the first public health investigation of emergency room cases resulting from the use of bath salts.  During a 4-month period in Michigan, 35 patients who had inhaled, injected, or ingested bath salts visited emergency rooms. Of these 35 patients, 17 were hospitalized and one was dead upon arrival.  Due to the increase in emergency room visits by people overdosing on bath salts, the DEA moved to make methylenedioxypyrovalerone, mephedrone, and methylone illegal.  

As of October 21, 2011, MDPV, its salts, isomers, and salts of isomers have been temporarily controlled in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.  So the point of all of this is that Meow Meow is now illegal, no matter where you are in the United States.  Also, it might be a bad idea to ingest it.

Drug charges are serious.  If you have been charged with a drug crime in Louisville, Lexington, Frankfort, Elizabethtown, or the surrounding areas, call the experienced drug charge lawyer Greg Simms.  The initial consultation is free, so call 502.473.6464 today.

Individual Attention.  Extraordinary Results.

See WWW.LOUISVILLEFIRM.COM

*Not to be confused with the frozen treat formerly available at Tommy’s Burger Palace in Lebanon, Kentucky.


Questions answered in this blog post:  What is meow meow; what are bath salts; what are bath salts drug; are bath salts legal in Kentucky; where could I get a delicious frozen "Blizzard"-like treat in central Kentucky around 1997; what are designer drugs; what is spice; what is the spice drug; where can I buy spice in Louisville; where can I buy spice drug in Louisville; what is fake marijuana in Kentucky; is fake marijuana legal in Kentucky; what drugs can't be detected in drug tests; which drugs are not detectable; DEA information on bath salts; how can I find a good Louisville drug charge lawyer; how can I find a good Louisville marijuana charge lawyer; what is MDPV; what are the negative effects of bath salts?

Free in Kentucky: The Reason Men HAVE to Watch Football on Sunday: I...

Free in Kentucky: The Reason Men HAVE to Watch Football on Sunday: I...: Yeah, it's kind of funny and then it's kind of not. There are a slew of exceptions (one particularly religious in nature) to the law. But ...

The Reason Men HAVE to Watch Football on Sunday: It is Illegal to Work on Sunday in Kentucky.

Yeah, it's kind of funny and then it's kind of not.

There are a slew of exceptions (one particularly religious in nature) to the law.  But the law in Kentucky states that you are not to work on Sunday.  The religious nature of the law would almost certainly lead to its being declared Unconstitutional as a violation of the Establishment Clause (as discussed in the previous blog post "Boozy Like a Sunday Morning" which addressed alcohol sales on Sunday).

Anyway, the law states:

KRS 436.160   Working on Sunday  -- Work of necessity or charity, athletic games and certain businesses and employers excluded -- Penalty.

(1) Any person who works on Sunday at his own or at any other occupation or employs any other person, in labor or other business, whether for profit or amusement, unless his work or the employment of others is in the course of ordinary household duties, work of necessity or charity or work required in the maintenance or operation of a public service or public utility plant or system, shall be fined not less than two dollars ($2) nor more than fifty dollars ($50). The employment of every person employed in violation of this subsection shall be deemed a separate offense.

(2) Persons who are members of a religious society which observes as a Sabbath any other day in the week than Sunday shall not be liable to the penalty prescribed in subsection (1) of this section, if they observe as a Sabbath one (1) day in each seven (7).

(3) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to amateur sports, athletic games, or operation of grocery stores whose principal business is the sale of groceries and related food items, drug stores whose principal business is the sale of drugs and related drug items, gift shops, souvenir shops, fishing tackle shops and bait shops, moving picture shows, chautauquas,* filling stations, or opera.

(4) Subsection (1) of this section shall not apply to employers using continuous work scheduling provided that such scheduling permits at least one (1) day of rest each calendar week for each employee.

I'm just going to end it here.  This law really burns my toast, so I'm not even going to talk about why it is almost certainly unenforceable.  Feel free to call me and ask about it if you have more questions.

*This is an "educational arts fair/exhibition" type of thing.  And an airline.  I'm assuming both would be excluded from the application of subsection (1).

Free in Kentucky: Running From the Police is Not Always as Fun as it...

Free in Kentucky: Running From the Police is Not Always as Fun as it...: In the news this week is a fella by the name of Morris Matthews. And I don’t know if he did anything illegal or not, but you have to expect...

Running From the Police is Not Always as Fun as it Sounds.

In the news this week is a fella by the name of Morris Matthews.  And I don’t know if he did anything illegal or not, but you have to expect some pretty legit accomplishments from a man who has a first name that also doubles as a last name.  Think about it.  Gilbert Gottfried, Julius Irving, Bruce Willis, Lawrence Taylor, Wayne Newton, Kirk Cameron.  The list goes on.  These people go the full 9.  If they do something, they do it big.  One can only expect that if Morris Matthews is alleged to have done something, the allegations also go the full 9.  Let’s see…

Per MSNBC: A preliminary hearing is scheduled for a Daviess County man who led police on a bizarre chase.  [Ok, they describe the chase as “bizarre.”  That’s a good start.]  Morris Matthews faces several charges after Louisville Metro police said he became violent with his fiancée and crashed two cars, one of which was stolen.  [Wait, what?  How does a man even get to use 2 cars during a chase???  Does one call “Time Out” and gain a few extra seconds for switching vehicles?  It says he crashed BOTH.  Does that mean he was quick enough to get out of a crashed car, run to another vehicle and steal it before cops could get their hands on him?]  Investigators said Matthews also almost ran over two nurses at a local hospital.  He's charged with wanton endangerment, robbery, resisting arrest, assault and criminal mischief.

I know what you’re thinking: “Running from the police is HILARIOUS!!!”

Whoa.  Slow down there, blog reader.  We’re talking about public safety here.  Running from the police is not always as hilarious as it sounds.  Sometimes people get hurt.  Granted, usually somebody gets hurt because the cops tase or put a knee in the back of guy who took off running.  But, people can get hurt.

Let’s look at a couple of different scenarios today.  We’ll look at a run-of-the-mill lighthearted romp of a police chase on foot, and then we’ll turn our attention to an all-out-stuff-to-the-wall outlawish dangerous hellride.

Scenario 1:  Everybody, including the local police, knows that Kirk Cameron recently robbed a bank in Raywick, Kentucky.  It’s been all over the news.  Kirk has been laying low in the St. Matthews area, trying to keep the fuzz off his trail.  Time passes, and one day Kirk Cameron’s pregnant wife makes him go to Homemade Ice Cream and Pie Kitchen (hereinafter, “the Pie Kitchen”) to get one of their awesome upside down cupcakes.  Kirk loves his wife, but the more pregnant she gets, the more she can be a real growing pain.  So he treks off to the Pie Kitchen to make her happy.  As Kirk walks to his destination, wouldn’t you know it, a police cruiser comes along and the police officer inside illuminates the emergency lights.  Kirk sees the cruiser, turns and high tails it.  The police tase the crap out of the former Tiger Beat coverguy and he falls to the ground.  Kirk is subsequently arrested and charged with “Fleeing or evading police in the first degree.”

Scenario 2:  Gilbert Gottfried goes on a heinous crime spree as jarring and harsh as the man’s voice itself.  After month long orgy of cocaine, gunplay and arson, Gottfried makes it to the list of America’s 10 Most Wanted criminals.  Gilbert’s spree culminates in a “bizarre” police chase.  After becoming violent with his fiancée, he crashes 2 cars, one of which is stolen.  To top it off, Gilbert nearly runs over 2 nurses at a local hospital.  Amongst other crimes, Mr. Gottfried is charged with “Fleeing or evading police in the first degree.”

Which, if either of the 2 gentlemen from our hypothetical scenarios, is guilty?

Let’s look at the law.  KRS 520.095 governs Fleeing or evading police in the first degree (hereinafter, at times, “F&E 1”).  It reads:

520.095   Fleeing or evading police in the first degree.

(1) A person is guilty of fleeing or evading police in the first degree:

(a) When, while operating a motor vehicle with intent to elude or flee, the person knowingly or wantonly disobeys a direction to stop his or her motor vehicle, given by a person recognized to be a police officer, and at least one (1) of the following conditions exists:

1. The person is fleeing immediately after committing an act of domestic violence as defined in KRS 403.720;

2. The person is driving under the influence of alcohol or any other substance or combination of substances in violation of KRS 189A.010;

3. The person is driving while his or her driver's license is suspended for violating KRS 189A.010; or

4. By fleeing or eluding, the person is the cause, or creates substantial risk, of serious physical injury or death to any person or property; or

(b) When, as a pedestrian, and with intent to elude or flee, the person knowingly or wantonly disobeys an order to stop, given by a person recognized to be a peace officer, and at least one (1) of the following conditions exists:

1. The person is fleeing immediately after committing an act of domestic violence as defined in KRS 403.720; or

2. By fleeing or eluding, the person is the cause of, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical injury or death to any person or property.

(2) Fleeing or evading police in the first degree is a Class D felony.

Conveniently, F&E 1 is broken into 2 major parts.  It specifically deals with fleeing while operating a motor vehicle under subsection (1)(a), and then turns attention to fleeing on foot, or “while a pedestrian” under subsection (1)(b).  Thus, Kirk Cameron’s case will be governed by (1)(b), and Gilbert Gottfried’s case will be governed by (1)(a).  Let’s take first things last.

It looks like Gilbert is in trouble for a couple of reasons.  Specifically, because he (presumably) damaged property (by crashing cars), and because of the whole “nearly killing the nurses at the local hospital” incident.  Under subsection (1)(a)(4), a Jury would most likely find that Gilbert created a substantial risk of serious physical injury or death to a person or property.  Gilbert needs a good Louisville criminal defense lawyer.

That about does it for today.  Tune in next time for…OOPS!  Like the rest of the world, I almost forgot about Kirk Cameron.*  Let’s talk about his case. 

Subsection (1)(b) of the statute, supra, governs fleeing on foot.  In order for a person to be guilty of F&E 1, they have to meet certain requirements while fleeing on foot.  Nothing about our hypothetical suggested any domestic violence [per subsection (1)(b)(1)].  And there wasn’t really any substantial risk of serious physical injury or death to person or property [per subsection (1)(b)(2)].  So it looks like Kirk is Not Guilty of the offense for which he is charged.  Let’s see if he might be Guilty of a lesser included offense.  KRS 520.100 governs Fleeing or evading police in the second degree (hereinafter, “F&E 2”), and it reads:

520.100   Fleeing or evading police in the second degree.

(1) A person is guilty of fleeing or evading police in the second degree when:

(a) As a pedestrian, and with intent to elude or flee, the person knowingly or wantonly disobeys a direction to stop, given by a person recognized to be a peace officer who has an articulable reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed by the person fleeing, and in fleeing or eluding the person is the cause of, or creates a substantial risk of, physical injury to any person; or

(b) While operating a motor vehicle with intent to elude or flee, the person knowingly or wantonly disobeys a recognized direction to stop his vehicle, given by a person recognized to be a peace officer.

(2) No offense is committed under this section when the conduct involved constitutes a failure to comply with a directive of a traffic control officer.

(3) Fleeing or evading police in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor.

We can rule out all of the subsections except (1)(a) as they contain requirements which are clearly not within the parameters of our fact pattern.  However, in order for a Jury to find him guilty of F&E 2, the Commonwealth would have to prove that his running was the cause of, or created a substantial risk of, physical injury to a person.  That would be a question for a Jury of Mr. Cameron’s peers.

In conclusion, running from the police is not always hilarious.  Sometimes people get hurt.

If you have been charged with Fleeing or Evading Police in Louisville, Lexington, Frankfort, Elizabethtown, or the surrounding areas, call me - Louisville DUI lawyer Greg Simms.  You will not be charged for an initial consultation, so call 502.618.4949 today. 

*SNAP!


Questions answered in this blog post:  what constitutes fleeing and evading in Kentucky; what is the difference between fleeing and evading in the first degree and fleeing and evading in the second degree; where can I find a good Louisville criminal defense attorney; what is the penalty for fleeing and evading police in Kentucky?

Free in Kentucky: Angry About the Amanda Knox Appeal? This Might Ex...

Free in Kentucky: Angry About the Amanda Knox Appeal? This Might Ex...: Let me start this off by saying I have NO education whatsoever on the Italian Judicial System. I have no idea about the procedure, crimes, ...

Angry About the Amanda Knox Appeal? This Might Explain Why Appeals Courts Do What They Do.

Let me start this off by saying I have NO education whatsoever on the Italian Judicial System.  I have no idea about the procedure, crimes, or admissibility of evidence in Italy.  I also don’t have any information about the Knox case other than what has been reported in the news.  I don’t know whether she did anything illegal or not.  I’m just a Louisville criminal defense lawyer who does Kentucky criminal appeals.  Not Italian.  That being said:

“Foxy Knoxy” as she has been dubbed by the press, is a free woman.

Per MSNBC: Amanda Knox headed home to the United States a free woman Tuesday, after an Italian appeals court dramatically overturned the American student's conviction of sexually assaulting and brutally slaying her British roommate.  Knox and Sollecito (a co-defendant) were convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering Kercher, who shared an apartment with Knox in Perugia. Knox was sentenced to 26 years, Sollecito to 25. Both had been in prison since Nov. 6, 2007, four days after Kercher's body had been found at the apartment.  According to MSNBC, the prosecution's case was blown apart by a court-ordered DNA review that discredited crucial genetic evidence.  So apparently, the basis for overturning Knox’s conviction was that the DNA evidence could not survive court scrutiny to be determined “credible” enough for admissibility. 

Let’s take a step back for a minute and just talk about appeals, in general.  In Kentucky, a Jury trial will be held at the District or Circuit Court level (depending on how serious the charges are).  If a Defendant is convicted at Jury Trial, they have the automatic right to an appeal.

When a case goes to Jury Trial, the Judge and Jury have two very different roles.  It may be helpful to think of the Trial Court Judge as a “referee” who calls the balls and strikes.  The Judge gets to decide matters of law, not questions of fact.  In more layman oriented terms, Judges don’t get to decide whether someone is or is not guilty.  That is the Jury’s job.  As far as today’s conversation is concerned, the Judge only gets to decide what evidence gets to come in, and what evidence has to stay out.  In order to decide this stuff, the Judge has to base the evidentiary decisions on the Kentucky Rules of Evidence (hereinafter, the “KRE”) and caselaw from courts which are binding on said Judge.

Let’s assume that this case happened in Kentucky.  Let us also assume that Knox was convicted on some DNA evidence, and that the DNA evidence had some problems with the “chain of custody.”  Specifically, the officer who testified at her trial informed the Court that he placed the DNA swabs in a little cardboard container.  However, when a lab tech from the Kentucky State Police crime lab testifies, the tech states that the DNA swabs arrived in a series of envelopes (NOT in a little cardboard container.  Knox’s attorney objects to the admission of the evidence at trial on the basis that the Commonwealth has failed to establish a chain of custody for the DNA swabs.  The Judge disagrees, and allows the evidence to be published to the Jury.  Later, the Jury finds Knox Guilty and Foxy Knoxy gets a Louisville criminal appeals lawyer and appeals the conviction.

Notice the Judge made a decision about whether the DNA evidence was admissible, but the Judge did NOT make the decision about whether Knox was Guilty or Not Guilty.  That was the Jury’s job.

When Knox appeals, she is appealing the decision of the Judge, not the Jury.  This is extremely important to understand.  Knox is appealing a decision that is purely evidentiary in nature.  She isn’t saying, “The Jury made a mistake because I am Not Guilty.”  In essence, she is saying, “The Judge made a mistake because chain of custody is needed for DNA swabs to be admissible.”  Those two questions are completely different. 

Apparently, the Appellate Court in Knox found that DNA evidence should not have been allowed into evidence because it was inherently unreliable.  If there was a problem with the reliability of the evidence, the Kentucky Court of Appeals probably would have come to the same conclusion.  Kentucky also has a rule concerning the scrutiny of credibility of evidence – balancing how “probative” the evidence might be against the “prejudice” that the evidence may invite.  Specifically, the Court of Appeals might have found in Knox’s case that, under KRE 403, the “probative value” of the DNA swab evidence was “substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.”  If so, the Kentucky Court of Appeals would have reversed the Knox case also (assuming the error was not harmless error).

From my reading of the MSNBC report, it seemed like the Appeals Court in Italy simply overturned her conviction and set her free.  That may or may not be the case - I may not understand what happened.*  However, if the Knox appeal was done in Kentucky, the end result most likely would have been different.  In Kentucky, if you can prove to the Court of Appeals that evidence was wrongly admitted by the Trial Court, and the error was not harmless, the Court of Appeals will “reverse and remand” the case.  That means the case will be sent back down to be tried again in front of the Jury.  But the Trial Judge will be instructed to keep out the evidence that was erroneously admitted.  So in Kentucky, Knox most likely would not be free.  She would be sitting in prison waiting for a new trial. 

If you need to appeal a criminal conviction, don’t choose a lawyer who has only done appeals “every once in a while.”  You need a Louisville criminal appeals lawyer who can get results.  If you need an appeal in Kentucky, call the lawyers at Gruner & Simms, PLLC at 502.618.4949.  The consultation is free.

Results.  As fast as the law will allow.

*but the pictures of her getting on and off the airplanes after the appeal sure make it look like she is free now.


Questions answered in this post: why did Amanda Knox get set free; what happened in the Amanda Knox case; why are people angry about the Amanda Knox case; what is the difference between the Italian and American judicial system; how do I get a criminal conviction reversed; what is the procedure in Kentucky for appealing a criminal case; how do I find a good Louisville appeal lawyer?