I have an offense report for possession of K2; has anyone worded a charging document for that yet? Willing to share?
Thanks, Lisa

Lisa L. Peterson
Nolan County Attorney

This would apply only to possession of JWH-018, JWH-073, JWH-200, CP-47,497 or cannabicyclohexanol between April 22, 2011 and September 1, 2011.

POSSESSION OF MISCELLANEOUS SUBSTANCE, H&SC SEC. 481.119, CLASS B MISDEMEANOR: On or about October 23, 2010, in MXXXXXXXXX County, Texas, RXXXX MXXXX, did then and there intentionally or knowingly possess a controlled substance listed in a schedule by an action of the commissioner under this chapter but not listed in a penalty group, namely, 1-Pentyl-3-(1-Naphthoyl)Indole (JWH-018), a Schedule I drug.

After September 1, these substances (and a few hundred more) will be listed in penalty group 2.

[This message was edited by Brett Peabody on 07-18-11 at .]

[This message was edited by Brett Peabody on 07-18-11 at .]

Thanks!!

Lisa L. Peterson
Nolan County Attorney

so now that it's in 2-A...how are you charging? sample language please?

I have filed 2 cases under the new law and have had lab tests in each one, so i knew which specific chemical compound to charge.
If you will forward me your fax number i can send it to you.
sorry I dont have it in electronic format.
Mike Hartman
scurryca@suddenlinkmail.com

thanks. and yeah, that's what i was wondering... are we required to plead the actual compounds or are we safe with the "cannabinoid receptor agonist and mimics the pharmacological...etc" definition...

i will have a lab test in this case as the kid says...there's nothing in there that's illegal! so i may just wait for the results. will be a pain if we have to have every sample tested to plead properly.

I *always* wait. There's too much room for error with the exacting nature of the statute for me to feel comfortable with a generic wording- and that generic wording in the statutory definition is too close to an analogue for THC (which is PG1) for me to be comfortable with that. I've seen so very few of them since the law has changed I don't really anticipate it being a problem to wait on analysis.

Also, I've seen at least once where the defendant claims up and down that it's K2/Spice, but the lab analysis has come back as marijuana.

The TDCAA Charging Manual includes that new offense.

thanks, Shannon. is there a 2012 manual or are you talking about the 2011?

See p. 259, possession of PG 2-A