All of our CS cases go through the DPS Houston lab, which presently has about a 6 month turnaround. Meantime, I get regular calls from the sheriff to clean out the jail. Some of these guys aren't even going to make a reduced bond and a PR bond is absolutely out of the question for some.

Can we expedite things if a defendant admits that what he or she bought, sold, ingested, etc. was definitely a CS?

Yes, it's quite common where I've practiced. Defendants will plead to an Information rather than sit in jail for months waiting on the labs.

John - So just go by the field weight to determine quantity?

Thankfully, our intake caseload is small enough that we can put our foot down and require this, but we don't accept our cases for prosecution without the mailing certificate showing the drugs have been submitted to the lab for analysis. To the best of my understanding, the weight on that form is determined by our evidence supervisor using a higher quality and more accurate measurement than what is obtained in the field.

If the defendant wants to plead prior to return of analysis, we go by the submission weight.

Just my two cents . . .

Thanks for the responses. We're going to give this a try.

That is a terrible suggestion. Don't cancel lab tests. If it comes back negative, the person was innocent of the crime.

We generally represent that we would agree to a motion for new trial if the lab result comes back negative after a plea.

Don't think of it as a writ "problem". It's a fact that established innocence. Might be a different crime to prosecute but not the one in the judgment.

The scandal in Dallas surfaced only after lab reports arrived showing the alleged cocaine was nothing more than powdered chalk.

[This message was edited by JB on 05-28-09 at .]

We have had a hand full of cases that pled on jail docket come back with negative lab results.

When it happens, the attorney is reappointed or an attorney is appointed to file the writ. Then we agree to the writ.

I agree with JB. Why would agreeing to a writ be a "problem" when the guy was convicted of the wrong crime?

Functionally, once a case is pled it is off my desk and i never see it again unless there is an MTR. The mail is opened by staff so a negative lab report will likely never be seen by a prosecutor and the negative lab report will just get thrown into a closed file.

I am uncomfortable with the idea that i have to "stay on top" of locating a lab that i may or may not get back within 6 months for a case/plea that i no longer have any memory of. Have i then violated the defendant's rights or is my office somehow liable if i don't catch the negative lab report? This is why i wait on a lab confirmation.....

Abigail
Parker County

Like it or not, it is your duty to seek justice. That duty does not end just because the lab report arrived after the plea.

I would not plead a case before the lab report came back--if I pled the guy and it turned out not to be drugs I believe that I was ineffective and had committed malpractice.

Either plan on your defendants getting out of jail for lack of lab reports (I did that sometimes, too) or have a backdoor out to allow them to be found not guilty if the drug tests come back no-drugs after they plead.

We have staff that opens the lab results. But when there's a negative result, the staff pulls the closed file. They bring the file and the test result to the attention of the attorney who pled the case. The attorney let's the court know and an attorney is appointed or notified to do the writ.

Truthfully, it's not that many cases. So, it's not like it's that heavy of a burden.

Plus, it's the right thing to do.

If we fail to adopt good practices, I guarantee you that eventually we are surrendering our ability to exercise discretion to someone else. It might be a judge who tells us that you are wrong. It might be a grievance committee that says we failed to perform ethically. It might be a legislator who sets a more rigid standard. And, for those of us who were elected, it might mean that the public loses confidence in our judgment.

We have an association to share our experiences and improve how we do our job. Sometimes that means we suffer criticism. But we must respond (or -- even better -- be proactive) by continuing to adopt the best practices that aim to achieve justice.