Court Opinion

ID: 9749592
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:52:37.322019+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:53.062522
License: Public Domain

COLE, Judge,
dissenting.
To me, the majority’s decision sets a very dangerous precedent. Throughout the state, drug dealers can feel safe in the knowledge that all they must do to avoid *689conviction on several counts of possession or distribution of controlled dangerous substances is dump all their “wares” into one container before being apprehended by the police. This is clearly not the message we should be sending to those in the drug community. Drugs in today’s society are a deadly and pervasive problem. Drug distributors are the root of that problem. A rule that is even the slightest bit lenient in favor of drug dealers is completely incongruous with the heinousness of their acts.
Such a soft approach is also incongruous with the clear legislative intent to punish drug distributors heavily. A quick glance at the harsh sentences provided for in the penalty section of Article 27, section 286 of the Maryland Controlled Dangerous Substances Act reveals that intent. Combining two dangerous drugs into one even more lethal combination should not enable drug dealers to avoid extra punishment. Nor should this Court circumvent the clear legislative mandate. Owens should have been convicted for both distribution of PCP and of marijuana (as well as for the conspiracy charge). Therefore, I dissent.