Source: https://www.robertslawteam.com/Recent-Cases/Drug-Charges-Case-Results.shtml
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 06:12:11+00:00

Document:
Accusation: Possession of Heroin, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-95(D)(1), PWIMSD Heroin, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-95(A)(1), Trafficking Opium or Heroin, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-95(H)(4), Maintaining a Vehicle/Dwelling/Place Controlled Substance, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-108(A)(7), Possession of a Stolen Firearm, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 14-71.1, Misdemeanor Possession of Marijuana up to 1/2 oz, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-95(D)(4), Misdemeanor Possession of Marijuana Paraphernalia, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 90-113.22A, and Possession of Firearm by Felon, in violation of N.C.G.S. § 14-415.1.
State v. Q.W.: Our client was accused of drug trafficking and many related offenses. The State built their case based on confidential informants and a search warrant for our client’s alleged stash house. After reviewing the search warrant, we filed a motion to suppress due to many legal insufficiencies in the warrant. For example, we believed that the informants relied on in the warrant were unreliable. We also felt that although the investigation of our client involved controlled buys, the details of those buys were insufficiently summarized in warrant. Ultimately, the Court agreed and found that the search warrant in our client’s case was not supported by probable cause, as a result, all charges were dismissed by the State.
Accusation: Three Counts of Trafficking in Cocaine over 400 grams, N.C.G.S. § 90-95.
Facing: Mandatory Minimum of 175 months in Prison on Each Count.
State v. R.P.: Our client was accused of trafficking kilogram quantities of cocaine. The State’s evidence including recordings, phone dumps for many phones, DEA Investigative Reports, and surveillance. Our client entered into a plea deal that allowed us to argue for probation, despite the large quantities of narcotics involved in the case. Given our client’s work history and otherwise clean record, we successfully convinced the Court to sentence our trafficking client to only probation.
North Carolina v. R.B.: Our client was arrested in a small county in Eastern North Carolina after police raided a residence with a search warrant and located large amounts of marijuana, cocaine, and a firearm. At the time our client retained our office to represent him, he had previously received a plea offer to plead guilty to the Possession of Firearm by Felon charge, under which he would have received a lengthy active prison sentence. After conducting a thorough review of the evidence and pointing out flaws in the State's case, we secured the dismissal of the Firearm by Felon charge and secured probation with no active time.
Accusation: Felony Level I Trafficking in Heroin, N.C.G.S. § 90-95(h); Simple Possession of Schedule VI (Marijuana) and Schedule IV (Xanax), N.C.G.S. § 90-95(d)(2) and (4).
Facing: Mandatory Minimum Sentence of 70 to 93 Months in Prison, and a Mandatory $50,000 Fine, for Trafficking Heroin; Followed by Sentences of 120 and 20 days for Simple Possession.
Result: Dismissal of the Felony Trafficking Charge in Exchange for Plea to Two Counts of Misdemeanor Simple Possession; Client Received Probation.
State v. R.M.: Our client was caught at a traffic checkpoint with a trafficking quantity of heroin. Our client was also found to be in possession of Xanax and Marijuana. When he requested and received a copy of the checkpoint plan that police used to conduct the checkpoint at issue, we realized that the plan had major problems from a constitutional standpoint. Therefore, we prepared a motion to suppress, provided it to the prosecutor’s office, and advised that our client would be filing and arguing the motion unless a favorable resolution could be reached prior to trial. In essence, our motion, if granted, would "throw-out" any evidence found on our client as a result of his stop at the unconstitutional checkpoint. Appreciating the strength of our motion, the district attorney agreed to allow our client to plead guilty to misdemeanors, even though he faced a mandatory minimum of well over 5 years in prison for the felony heroin trafficking charge alone.
State v. S.C.: Client was charged along with 2 other codefendants in the manufacturing and trafficking of methamphetamine. After law enforcement found a "clandestine laboratory" in the codefendant's vehicle, a search warrant was executed at our client's home. Law enforcement located cleaning supplies and alleged that the cleaning supplies were "methamphetamine precursors." Our client was facing mandatory prison time, if convicted. The Assistant District Attorney indicted our client as a "habitual felon," due to his prior criminal history, exposing our client to even more active jail time if convicted. Further complicating matters, Defendant was already on probation at the time of the offense and, if convicted, he was facing the activation of his probation sentence. We placed the case on a trial calendar and demanded to inspect the evidence seized from our client's home. After inspecting evidence and identifying weaknesses in the state's case, we were able to persuade the Assistant District Attorney to dismiss four of our client's charges and stipulate to a full probationary sentence on the remaining offense. We further persuaded the judge to strike our client's probation supervision fees for the duration of his probationary sentence.
North Carolina v. M.R.: Our client was arrested and charged with the most serious drug trafficking charges that exist under North Carolina law - multiple counts of Level III Heroin Trafficking - after she was apprehended at Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) with what police and federal agents described as 582 grams of heroin (over 1 pound). After gaining access to a key lab report that showed the substance seized by law enforcement from our client was not actually heroin - or any other controlled substance - all charges against our client were dismissed.
Charges: Trafficking 400 grams or more of Methamphetamine, N.C.G.S. § 90-95(h)(3b)(c); Possession with Intent to Manufacture Methamphetamine, N.C.G.S. § 90-95(a)(1).
Facing: Mandatory Minimum 225 months for Trafficking in addition to 231 months for Possession with Intent to Sell.
Result: Conditional Discharge - all charges will be dismissed upon completion of probation.
State v. A.S.: Our client was caught with well over 400 grams of methamphetamine. The client was stopped after attempting to avoid a DWI checkpoint. Despite the very large amount of methamphetamine involved and the strength of the State's case, we were able to negotiate a plea resolution that requires that all of our client's charges are dismissed, provided he successfully completes probation.
State v. V.E.: Defendant was stopped in his car for a Window Tint Violation and Driving While License Revoked. The officer searched Defendant's car based on alleged odor of marijuana, after detaining him from a questionable period of time. After questioning the validity of the officer's actions during the stop and offering some general character information about our client, we were able to persuade the Assistant District Attorney to allow our client to enter a plea to Attempted Trafficking. This allowed our firm to argue for and win a probationary sentence on behalf of our client.
State v. B.F.: Our client was approached by law enforcement while standing outside his vehicle in the parking lot of his place of employment. During questioning, he confessed to using marijuana and having marijuana in his vehicle. Upon consenting to a search of his vehicle, law enforcement found cocaine in the center console. Our client had a lengthy criminal record and was facing an active prison term if convicted. After our client retained our firm, we challenged the legality of our client's detainment in the parking lot. Upon reviewing our legal arguments, the Assistant District Attorney offered our client a misdemeanor plea to Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. Sentencing was in the discretion of the court. At the sentencing hearing, we successfully assisted our client in avoiding active prison time and supervised probation. Our client only had to pay small fine and complete a substance abuse assessment.
State v. A.S.: Our client was stopped by law enforcement for illegally parking his girlfriend's car. As part of the investigation, his girlfriend was interviewed and bruises were discovered on her arms and chest. She accused our client of assault her. After placing him under arrest, officers found cocaine in our client's pocket. Once our client was charged, the Assistant District Attorney discovered a prior record of assaults and wanted to bring additional charges against our client for Felony Habitual Misdemeanor Assault. However, we were able to assist our client and his girlfriend with obtaining couples counseling and our client underwent a voluntary substance abuse assessment. Using this information, we were able to persuade the State to dismiss the Assault charge, rather than add another felony to the charges. The felony drug charge was reduced to a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge. Our client's prior record made him eligible for an active jail sentence, even for a misdemeanor offense. However, we were able to incorporate in his plea arrangement that he receive a probationary sentence.
Charges: Trafficking in Heroin (two counts), N.C.G.S. § 90-95(h)(4); Possession with Intent to Distribute Heroin, N.C.G.S. § 90-95(a)(1).
Facing: mandatory prison sentence of 70 to 93 months on each count of Trafficking in Heroin; and 25 to 42 months for PWISD Heroin.
Result: Alford plea to possession of heroin pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 90-96(a)(1)-case will be dismissed upon completion of probation.
State v. B.J.: Our client was driving a vehicle that was stopped and searched by law enforcement. In the car, approximately 100 baggies of heroin were located. The firm argued to the State that the stop and search violated the Fourth Amendment, and that even if the stop and search was lawful, our client was innocent. Despite the fact that our client was a convicted felon who had previously served a lengthy prison sentence, the State agreed to dismiss the trafficking charges and reduce the PWISD charge to allow our client to enter into the N.C.G.S. § 90-96 diversionary program-our client's case will be dismissed upon his completion of probation. The firm also persuaded the State to allow our client to accept the N.C.G.S. § 90-96 plea pursuant to Alford, meaning our client never admitted guilt.
North Carolina vs. N.K. - Our client was involved in a narcotics buy-bust by officers with the Hertford County Sheriff's Department, who located approximately 21 grams of crack cocaine as well as more than one ounce of marijuana in our client's vehicle. After making a strong argument to the district attorney that our client's constitutional rights were violated through the use of uncorroborated tip from an informant resulting in an illegal search, all felony charges against our client were dismissed. He pled guilty to a minor misdemeanor and was sentenced to unsupervised probation, allowing him to return to his job and family in another state.
North Carolina vs. A.S. - Our client was one of several individuals in a vehicle stopped by law enforcement for a minor traffic infraction. The vehicle stop was quickly transformed into a full scale drug investigation when, prior to the car stopping in response to the officer's blue lights, one of the individuals in the car threw an unknown object out the window. Police later found a small baggie containing cocaine, and all of the occupants of the vehicle were charged with Felony Possession of Cocaine. After presenting compelling evidence of innocence to the prosecutor, including the client's passed drug test within hours of the arrest, all charges were dismissed.
State v. M.T. - Client's home was searched, pursuant to a warrant, and over 28 grams worth of oxycodone pills were found in her bedroom. Client admitted to law enforcement that the pills belonged to her. We filed a Motion to Suppress the results of the search warrant based on lack of probable cause. We presented our motion to the Assistant District Attorney, along with documentation of our client's background, ongoing education, and work history. We also presented drug screens from our client after the date of the arrest, demonstrating our client's reformed behavior. We were able to persuade the District Attorney to reduce the charges to Felony Possession of a Schedule II Controlled Substance. We went even further and persuaded the sentencing judge to allow our client to enroll in a drug deferral program, whereby our client will secure a dismissal of all charges in one year.
United States of America v. L.J. - Our client was indicted on federal drug charges including three counts of Distribution of a Quantity of Heroin and one count of Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute a Quantity of Heroin. Because of a prior felony drug conviction, our client was facing a sentence enhancement pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b), resulting in a possible sentence of 120 years. We convinced the United States Attorney not to pursue the sentence enhancement and negotiated a plea deal in which our client pled guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute a Quantity of Heroin in exchange for the dismissal of the three counts charging Distribution of a Quantity of Heroin. In a sentencing memorandum before the Judge, we argued and were able to obtain a significantly reduced sentence of 56 months.
Charges: Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 280 Grams or More of Cocaine (21 U.S.C. § 846), and Possession with Intent to Distribute 28 Grams or More of Cocaine Base (Crack) and a Quantity of Cocaine (2 Counts) (21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)).
United States of America v. G.O. - Our client was charged with Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 280 Grams or More of Cocaine and two counts of Possession with Intent to Distribute 28 Grams or More of Cocaine Base and a Quantity of Cocaine. Because of a prior felony drug conviction, our client was facing a sentence enhancement pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 841(b). As a result, our client was facing 20 years to life in prison. We convinced the United States Attorney not to pursue the sentence enhancement and negotiated a plea deal in which our client pled guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute 280 Grams or More of Cocaine and the State dismissed the charges of Possession with Intent to Distribute 28 Grams or More of Cocaine Base and a Quantity of Cocaine. We argued and successfully negotiated for a significantly reduced sentence of 66 months.
North Carolina v. P.S. - Our client was pulled over for a traffic violation and was found to be in the possession of a large amount of marijuana and multiple cell phones. We were able to negotiate the dismissal of the felony charges. Our client pled guilty to two misdemeanor counts of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. He was put on supervised probation for 24 months and received a 45-day suspended sentence.
North Carolina v. T.S. - Police stopped our client's girlfriend after she left our client's house. She was found to be in the possession of ounces of crack. Our client was subsequently charged with two counts of Trafficking Cocaine, Felony Maintaining a Dwelling for a Controlled Substance, Possession of Marijuana up to One-Half Ounce, and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. We filed a motion to suppress challenging the stop of our client's girlfriend and its connection to our client. The Assistant District Attorney made a plea offer. We rejected the offer and continued to challenge the stop and its connection to our client and the Assistant District Attorney dismissed the charges.
North Carolina v. M.G. - Our client was found to be in the possession of prescription drugs from his job site. He was accused of selling the prescription pills to a friend who also sold pills. We negotiated a non-trafficking resolution in which our client pled guilty to Selling Opiates and Larceny by Employee in exchange for the dismissal of all other charges. Our client was sentenced to 13-25 months.
North Carolina v. L.M. - A search warrant was executed on our client's home after her husband was stopped for a traffic violation and found to be in the possession of marijuana. As a result of the search warrant, our client was indicted on the above charges. We argued that our client was not involved or connected to her husband's actions and persuaded the Assistant the District Attorney to dismiss all charges pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 90-96.
Charges: Possession with Intent to Manufacture, Sell or Deliver Schedule I Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(a)(1)), Felony Maintaining a Vehicle for Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-108(a)(7)), Simple Possession Schedule III Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(a)(3)), Simple Possession Schedule IV Controlled Substance (N.C.G.S. § 90-95(a)(3)), Resisting Public Officer (3 Counts) (N.C.G.S. § 14-223), DWI (N.C.G.S. § 20-138.1), and 3 other Traffic Violations.
North Carolina v. G.G. - We negotiated a misdemeanor plea deal for our client that allowed him to plead guilty to a DWI and Misdemeanor Maintaining a Vehicle for a Controlled Substance in exchange for the State dismissing all felony charges and the remaining misdemeanor charges. Our client received 12 months of unsupervised probation and a 60-day suspended sentence for the DWI, and 12 months of unsupervised probation and a 45-day suspended sentence for the misdemeanor Maintaining a Vehicle.
North Carolina v. R.P. - Our client was accused of selling opiates and charged with Conspiring to Traffic Opium or Heroin. He was facing a minimum of 78 months. We were able to negotiate a non-trafficking resolution in which our client pled to Possession with Intent to Manufacture, Sell, or Deliver a Schedule II Controlled Substance and he received a 6-17 month sentence.
United States of America v. M.R. - Our client was indicted on federal drug charges of Conspiracy to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Oxycodone and Hydrocodone, Distribution of Oxycodone, and Distribution of Hydrocodone. After negotiating a dismissal of both distribution charges in exchange for a plea to the conspiracy charge, our client was facing up to 20 years in prison. The Presentence Investigation Report stated the guideline imprisonment range was 108-135 months. We argued that the discrepancies in drug quantity between the witness testimony and factual investigation supported an imprisonment range of 57 to 71 months. Our client received 66 months.
United States of America v. H.S. - Our client participated in the sale of K2 and Bath Salts that contained synthetic chemicals mimicking those that constitute marijuana and methamphetamine and cocaine. The drugs were picked up in one state and sold in various other states. The drugs were also misbranded. We negotiated a plea in which our client pled guilty to misdemeanor Adulteration or Misbranding of any Food and Drug, Aiding and Abetting, in exchange for the dismissal of all other charges. Our client was sentenced to 5 months.
North Carolina v. F.D. - This case had been ongoing for years before we took it over from another attorney. Our client had previously pled guilty to Trafficking More than 28 Grams in Opium and Obtaining a Controlled Substance by Fraud or Forgery. His plea was appealed and withdrawn. Despite our client's high prior record level, we were able to negotiate a resolution that saved him 13-17 years. Our client pled guilty to Attempted Trafficking in Opium and the State dismissed Obtaining a Controlled Substance by Fraud. Our client was sentenced to 72-96 months.
North Carolina v. B.V. - As a result of interstate marijuana shipments, our client was charged with trafficking 50 pounds or more of marijuana. He was facing a mandatory minimum of 35 months in prison. We negotiated unsupervised probation for 36 months with a suspended 6-17 month sentence in exchange for a plea to Attempted Trafficking in Marijuana.
North Carolina v. A.W. - Our client was pulled over for expired tags and a search revealed that he was in possession of pounds of fake synthetic cannabinoids. We discovered that our client's tags were not expired and were valid by one day. We filed a motion to suppress challenging the reasonable suspicion to stop on the ground that the tags were not expired and the charges against our client were dismissed.
North Carolina v. J.P. - We negotiated a plea deal in which our client pled guilty to Attempted Trafficking of Opium and the State dismissed the felony Obtaining a Controlled Substance by Fraud or Forgery. Our client was sentenced to 16-29 months.
United States of America v. T.D. - Law enforcement seized kilograms of marijuana, a colt .45 caliber pistol, a shotgun, and a 12 gauge shotgun from our client. Our client was then charged and pled guilty to Possession with the Intent to Distribute Marijuana and Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime. Our client's guideline range under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines was initially 106-117 months based on a quantity of marijuana greater than 100 kilograms. We filed objections disputing the amount of marijuana. As a result, our client's revised guideline range was 84-90 months. In a sentencing memorandum before the judge, we successfully argued for a downward variance in our client's sentence. He received 72 months and 3 years of supervised release.
State v. A.G. - Our client was indicted on charges of Trafficking Hydrocodone, Possession with Intent to Sell Marijuana, Maintaining a Vehicle for Controlled Substances, and Speeding. We negotiated a plea deal with the Assistant District Attorney to drop the Felony Drug Trafficking charge. The Speeding charge was also dismissed. Our client pled guilty to Possession with Intent to Sell and Distribute Hydrocodone and Maintaining a Vehicle for Controlled Substances. Our client received a suspended sentence of 11- 14 months and was placed on supervised probation for 24 months.
North Carolina v. B.M. - Law enforcement arrested our client, a foreign national, after he made drug sales to an informant on three separate occasions. Our client admitted his involvement to law enforcement. We argued that our client suffered from a severe drug addiction and provided documentation to the Assistant District Attorney that supported our position. We were able to persuade the court to not sentence our client to the maximum possible punishment at the sentencing hearing.
Patrick's law group was awesome when I was being investigated by the police for allegations made by one of my children. His team was able to present our side of the story and show that these things did not happen as was being alleged. Because of his actions the police decided to not pursue charges. I would hire them again in a heartbeat.

References: § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 § 14
 § 90
 § 90
 § 14
 v. 
 § 90
 v. 
 v. 
 § 90
 § 90
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 90
 § 90
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 v. 
 § 90
 § 90
 v. 
 v. 
 § 841
 § 846
 § 841
 v. 
 § 841
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 § 90
 § 14
 § 20
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.