What You Need to Know About Possession and Use of Drug Related Objects: O.C.G.A. §16-13-32.2
In Georgia, criminal laws concerning drug use and possession are taken seriously, and one of the statutes that address illegal activities in relation to controlled substances is O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2, which specifically deals with the possession and use of drug-related objects.
While most people are familiar with laws concerning the possession of drugs themselves, this statute is focused on the tools and devices used to facilitate drug use or trafficking.
As a criminal defense law firm, it is essential to understand the full scope of this statute to ensure effective defense strategies for those accused of violating it.
As Georgia criminal defense lawyers, we wanted to write a blog post exploring what Section 16-13-32.2 covers, the potential penalties for violations, and some of the defenses that may be available to individuals facing charges.
What Does Section 16-13-32.2 Cover?
Georgia’s O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2 makes it illegal to possess or use drug-related objects. These objects are typically items that can be used for the consumption, manufacture, or preparation of illegal drugs. The law covers a broad range of potential items, from pipes and needles to scales and baggies, all of which could be deemed drug-related objects if they are intended for illicit drug use.
Key Points of the Statute
- Possession of Drug Related Objects: A person can be charged under this statute for merely possessing an object that is associated with drug use or manufacture. The key element here is the intended use of the object.
- Use of Drug Related Objects: This involves any actual use of the object in the consumption or preparation of illegal drugs, such as using a pipe to smoke methamphetamine or heroin.
- Illegal Devices or Equipment: The statute also covers any devices or equipment that might be used to produce, prepare, or distribute controlled substances, even if they have a legitimate use in other contexts.
- Intention: A key factor in a prosecution under this statute is the intent behind the possession or use of the object. For example, possession of a scale may not automatically lead to charges unless the prosecution can demonstrate that the scale was intended for weighing illegal drugs.
What Are Examples of Drug-Related Objects?
The following are some common examples of objects that may be considered “drug related” under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2:
- Pipes and Bongs: Commonly used for smoking marijuana, methamphetamine, or crack cocaine. If found in possession of these objects and there is a reasonable belief they were used for illegal drug consumption, a person could face charges.
- Syringes and Needles: These are typically associated with intravenous drug use, such as injecting heroin, meth, or other illegal substances.
- Rolling Papers and Cigarette Filters: While these can be used for legal purposes, in the context of drugs, they may be considered drug-related if they are associated with the preparation of illegal substances.
- Scales: Digital or analog scales can be used to weigh illegal drugs, which might indicate drug trafficking activity.
- Plastic Baggies and Containers: These are often used for packaging illegal drugs for sale or distribution.
- Glassware or Tools for Manufacturing Drugs: In cases of drug manufacturing or the production of substances like methamphetamine, any tools or devices used in the manufacturing process may be considered drug related.
- Roach Clips or Other Drug Accessories: Items like these may be linked to the use or preparation of marijuana or other drugs.
Penalties for Violating Section 16-13-32.2, Possession and Use of Drug-Related Objects
The penalties for violating O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2 can vary based on the nature of the offense and the circumstances surrounding the alleged crime. Generally, violations are considered misdemeanors, but there are certain circumstances under which a person could face more serious penalties.
Misdemeanor Charges
- Standard Possession of Drug Related Objects: If a person is found in possession of drug-related objects without additional charges of drug possession or trafficking, they will typically face misdemeanor charges. Misdemeanors in Georgia are punishable by up to 12 months in jail and fines up to $1,000.
Aggravated Circumstances and Enhanced Penalties
In some cases, a violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2 may be considered more serious, especially if the person is found with multiple objects used in drug manufacturing or distribution. Under these circumstances, a judge could impose more severe penalties, including:
- Extended Jail Time: While a standard misdemeanor carries up to 12 months of jail time, a person with prior drug convictions or other aggravating factors could face longer incarceration.
- Increased Fines: If the offense involves the use of multiple drug-related objects, fines could exceed the standard $1,000 limit.
Defenses to Charges Under Section 16-13-32.2
Here are 35 possible defenses to Georgia’s Section 16-13-32.2: Possession and Use of Drug Related Objects:
1. Lack of Knowledge of the Object's Presence
- The defendant did not know the object was in their possession or in their immediate control. For example, a drug-related object could have been left behind by someone else, and the defendant was unaware of it.
2. Lack of Knowledge the Object Was Drug-Related
- The defendant may not have known that the object in question was used for drug-related purposes. For example, a pipe could have been mistaken for a tobacco pipe or a syringe could have been used for medical purposes.
3. No Intent to Use the Object for Drugs
- The defendant may not have intended to use the object for illegal drug consumption or distribution. The object could have been possessed for a legitimate purpose, such as a scale for weighing other substances, or a syringe for personal medical use.
4. No Actual Use of the Object for Drugs
- Possession of a drug-related object alone is not enough to be convicted. If there is no evidence that the object was used for drug-related activity, the defense could argue that there was no actual use or intent to use it for drugs.
5. No Drugs Were Found
- The prosecution must prove that the object was connected to drugs. If no illegal drugs were found in the defendant’s possession, it may be difficult for the prosecution to argue that the object was intended for drug use.
6. Involuntary Possession
- The defendant may not have had control over the object. If the object was found in a shared space (such as a vehicle or house with others), the defendant may argue that they did not possess the object knowingly or voluntarily.
7. The Object Belonged to Someone Else
- The defendant could argue that the object belonged to another person, and they had no knowledge or control over it. For instance, a syringe or pipe may belong to another individual in a shared residence.
8. Lack of Probable Cause for Search
- If the object was found as a result of an unlawful search (e.g., without a warrant or probable cause), the evidence may be inadmissible. The defense can argue that the search violated the defendant’s constitutional rights.
9. Object Was Not Designed or Intended for Drug Use
- The object in question may have a legitimate, non-drug-related purpose. For example, a pipe could be a decorative item or a medical device, and a scale could be used for weighing legitimate items (such as jewelry).
10. False Accusations
- The defendant could argue that they were falsely accused by someone who planted the object or made a false report. This defense might apply in situations where someone else in the defendant's proximity is involved in drug-related activities.
11. Entrapment
- The defendant may argue that they were induced or coerced by law enforcement into possessing or using a drug-related object they would not have otherwise used or possessed. If law enforcement overstepped legal boundaries in persuading the defendant, this could form an entrapment defense.
12. No Criminal Intent
- The defendant may argue that they did not have the criminal intent required by law. The mere presence of a drug-related object does not necessarily prove criminal intent unless there is evidence that the defendant intended to use it for illegal drug purposes.
13. Object Found in Public Place
- The defendant may argue that the object was found in a public place, and they were not in actual possession of it. For example, if a pipe or syringe was found on the ground, it may be argued that it was not in the defendant's control.
14. Challenge to the Object’s Identification
- The defense may challenge the identification of the object as a "drug-related" item. For example, they may argue that the item is not in fact used for drugs or has multiple legitimate uses.
15. Object Was Not Under the Defendant's Control
- If the object was found in a vehicle or shared residence, the defense could argue that the defendant did not have exclusive control over the area where the object was found and could not be deemed to possess the object.
16. Lack of Connection Between the Object and Illegal Activity
- If the prosecution cannot prove a direct link between the object and the illegal drug activity (e.g., no drugs found or no evidence of drug-related activity), the defense could argue that the object was not used for drug-related purposes.
17. Object Found in an Open or Shared Space
- If the drug-related object was found in a space shared with others (such as a dorm room, car, or apartment), the defendant could argue that they did not have exclusive access or control over the object, and someone else could have placed it there.
18. Disputing the Object’s Condition
- The defense may argue that the object was not in usable condition for drug-related purposes. For instance, a syringe might be empty or a pipe might be broken, making it unreasonable to assume it was used for illegal purposes.
19. Tainted Evidence Due to Police Misconduct
- If the police engaged in misconduct during the investigation (e.g., using excessive force, planting evidence, or failing to follow procedure), the defense may argue that the evidence was tainted and should be excluded.
20. Illegal Search and Seizure
- The defense could argue that the evidence was obtained through an illegal search. If the defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were violated (e.g., the police did not have a valid warrant or probable cause), the drug-related object should be excluded from evidence.
21. Good Faith Use of the Object
- The defendant may argue that they used the object for a legitimate, non-drug-related purpose. For example, a pipe may have been used for legal purposes, or a syringe could have been for insulin injections or other medical treatments.
22. Object Was Abandoned or Left Behind
- If the object was abandoned or left behind by someone else, the defense could argue that the defendant had no connection to the object or the intention to use it for drug-related purposes.
23. No Evidence of Distribution or Trafficking
- The prosecution must demonstrate that the object was intended for use in drug distribution or trafficking. Without evidence of drug sales or trafficking activities, a defense can be made that the object was only intended for personal use.
24. Defendant Was Not Present When the Object Was Found
- If the object was found in a place where the defendant was not present (for example, in a car or a room they do not have exclusive access to), this could be used as a defense against possession charges.
25. The Object Was Found in Plain View
- If the object was found in plain view without any reasonable suspicion or lawful search, the defense may argue that the evidence was improperly seized and should be excluded.
26. Object Found After an Improperly Executed Warrant
- If a search warrant was improperly executed, for instance, by entering a residence without following proper procedures or not specifying the items being searched for, any evidence found, including drug-related objects, could be inadmissible.
27. Mistaken Identity
- The defendant may argue that they were mistakenly identified as the person possessing the drug-related object. This could happen if the object was found in a place or vehicle where the defendant was not directly involved.
28. Lack of Evidence of Ownership
- The prosecution must prove that the defendant was the owner or had control over the drug-related object. If the prosecution cannot establish ownership or control, the defense can argue that the defendant was not in possession of the object.
29. Inconsistent or Conflicting Evidence
- The defense can argue that the evidence presented by the prosecution is inconsistent or conflicting. For example, if the police officer's report conflicts with witness statements or the defendant’s account, this can undermine the prosecution’s case.
30. Insufficient Evidence of Intent to Use the Object for Drugs
- Even if the object is drug-related, the prosecution must show that the defendant had the intent to use it for illegal drug purposes. If the prosecution fails to demonstrate this, the charges could be reduced or dismissed.
31. Defendant Was Under Duress
- If the defendant was forced to possess the drug-related object due to threats or pressure from another individual, they might argue that they were acting under duress.
32. Public Place Doctrine
- If the object was found in a public space or in a manner that was not associated with illegal activity, the defendant might argue that the object was not possessed for any illegal purpose.
33. Object Was Used for Personal Use, Not Distribution
- If the object was intended solely for the defendant's personal use (and not for distribution or trafficking), the defense may argue that the charge should be reduced from a more serious offense to a lesser one.
34. Challenge the Legality of the Statute
- In some cases, a defendant might challenge the constitutionality of O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2 itself, arguing that it is overly broad, vague, or violates the defendant’s rights under the U.S. Constitution.
35. No Evidence of Trafficking or Manufacturing
- The defendant can argue that the mere possession of drug-related objects is not enough to prove drug trafficking or manufacturing. The prosecution must show additional evidence to establish that the defendant was involved in these activities.
Potential Impact on Other Charges
Charges under Section 16-13-32.2 may be closely linked to other criminal offenses. For example, if a person is caught with both drugs and drug-related objects, the charges could be more severe, especially if the defendant is accused of drug trafficking or distribution.
A skilled criminal defense attorney will need to consider all the evidence in the case to determine whether the prosecution has sufficient grounds to pursue additional charges and how best to defend against those charges.
Georgia Possession and Use of Drug Related Objects Lawyer
Georgia’s Section 16-13-32.2 provides important regulations concerning the possession and use of drug-related objects.
While possession of an object alone may not seem as serious as possessing drugs, individuals facing charges under this statute may still face significant penalties. With the right legal defense strategy, however, it is possible to fight such charges and potentially reduce the severity of the consequences.
If you or someone you know is facing charges under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-32.2, it is essential to consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney at The Sherman Law Group who understands the complexities of drug-related offenses. We can help evaluate the evidence against you, explore potential defenses, and ensure that your rights are protected throughout the legal process.