What's the deal with Mexican prescriptions? I have a case where defendant gets stopped and has Rohypnol (flunitrazepam) which he says he got by getting a prescription from a doctor in Mexico. He produces no prescription, though. Since Rohypnol is a Penalty Group one drug and you can't even legitimately get it in the U.S., even if his story is true about a prescription and even if he could produce it (which he can't), isn't this still illegal? Isn't it analagous to going to Mexico and getting a prescription for cocaine? Is it different for Penalty Group three drugs, like Valium (diazepam) -- drugs for which you can get in the U.S. with a prescription?

The original case that sparked all of this was Wright v. State, 981 S.W.2d 197 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). What can be digested from it and the ensuing mess is that Federal law is going to trump state law in that an individual can bring back prescriptions from Mexico. The caveat is that they must be for a valid medical purpose and that the holder of the pills must be the valid end user. I think there is a good question for the jury when you have a defendant with hundreds (and sometimes thousands) of pills that, if taken as prescribed, would result in a coma at the very least. Clearly indicates intent to deliver. Hence, no end user or valid medical purpose. I liken this to the case I prosecuted where the defendant had hundreds of diet pills, yet he only weighed 135 lbs.

Be prepared for defensive issues such as mistake of fact or law, which I don't think fly. Additionally, the Customs stamp on the prescription is probably hearsay and can be removed before going to the jury.

Your situation is even easier in that Rohypnol (flunitrazepam) is not allowed for importation by the Feds. Therefore, the defendant has no valid defenses.