<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CRIMINAL JURISDICTION &#187; drugs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/tag/drugs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog</link>
	<description>CRIMINAL JURISDICTION: Criminal Law Blog by Defense Lawyer John Floyd and Mr. Billy Sinclair</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:44:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>TWO CONFESSIONS: DIFFERENT CONSTITUTIONAL STANDARDS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2012/01/23/two-confessions-different-constitutional-standards/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2012/01/23/two-confessions-different-constitutional-standards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 19:20:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[confessions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[detention confession rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal search]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Confessions after Illegal Search Should be Suppressed if Influenced by Underlying Illegality, Violation of Forth Amendment

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

There are primarily two types of unlawful confessions: custodial confessions obtained in violation of the Fifth Amendment and confessions obtained as products of an illegal search in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had a recent opportunity in United States v. Shetler to address the latter.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2012/01/23/two-confessions-different-constitutional-standards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE IMPACT OF PINHOLSTER ON NEWLY-DISCOVERED EVIDENCE AND BRADY VIOLATIONS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/12/17/the-impact-of-pinholster-on-newly-discovered-evidence-and-brady-violations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/12/17/the-impact-of-pinholster-on-newly-discovered-evidence-and-brady-violations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2011 20:21:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Houston Criminal Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death sentence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Murder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecutorial misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robbery]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=695</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In January 1982, Scott Lynn Pinholster, a California native, was an Aryan Brotherhood-type who, along with two like-minded cohorts, went to the home of a local drug dealer named Michael Kumar. The drug dealer was not at home when the Neo-Nazi trio arrived so they began to ransack the residence in search of drugs and money. At this inopportune time, two of Kumar’s friends, Thomas Johnson and Robert Beckett, arrived at the drug dealer’s home where they confronted the burglars. That confrontation led to Pinholster and his cohorts brutally beating and repeatedly stabbing Johnson and Beckett until they were dead.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/12/17/the-impact-of-pinholster-on-newly-discovered-evidence-and-brady-violations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DOUBLE STANDARD OF EVIDENCE IN CONRAD MURRAY TRIAL</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/08/double-standard-of-evidence-in-conray-murray-trial/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/08/double-standard-of-evidence-in-conray-murray-trial/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 21:05:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Federal Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug addiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manslaughter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pedophilia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Jury selection has begun in the high profile criminal case against Dr. Conrad Murray, the physician charged with involuntary manslaughter in the drug overdose and death of Michael Jackson.  This comes the day after a California Court of Appeals denied Murray’s request to have the jury sequestered in what will assuredly be intense media coverage and “expert” speculation.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/08/double-standard-of-evidence-in-conray-murray-trial/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES CRACK-POWDER COCAINES 713 AMENDMENT</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/07/26/supreme-court-clarifies-crack-powder-cocaines-713-amendment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/07/26/supreme-court-clarifies-crack-powder-cocaines-713-amendment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 23:22:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Crack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FEDERAL SENTENCING]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sentence reduction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=629</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Federal Crack Sentence Reductions: Defendants Sentenced Pursuant to 11(c)(1)(C) Agreements Eligible for 3582(c)(2) Relief

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In 2007 the U.S. Sentencing Commission issued a retroactive amendment, Amendment 713, to the Sentencing Guidelines designed to eliminate the sentencing disparities in crack cocaine and powder cocaine cases. The amendment became effective in March 2008, and promptly triggered an outbreak of conflicting appellate court decisions, prompting the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene on several occasions and to restore judicial order (here and here). This past term the Court was once again was forced to confront another issue spun off by Amendment 713: whether the amendment could be retroactively applied in cases where a defendant entered into a plea agreement with the Government for a specific sentence. The Court, in Freeman v. United States, answered that question in the affirmative, although in a plurality decision.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/07/26/supreme-court-clarifies-crack-powder-cocaines-713-amendment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MILITARIZED POLICE NO KNOCK SEARCHES KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/06/17/militarized-police-no-knock-searches-kill-innocent-people/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/06/17/militarized-police-no-knock-searches-kill-innocent-people/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 23:55:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[no knock search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police state]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=616</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recent U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Expanding “No Knock” Powers of the Police and Insulating Law Enforcement Abuses Allow a Growing Police State

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

We are no fans of “no knock” searches by the police, especially those launched by militarized SWAT units. We made this clear after a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision expanding police powers to conduct such searches (here). We don’t like them because they kill innocent people indiscriminately. We have permitted our law enforcement agencies to become so militarized that “no knock” searches increased from 3,000 in 1981 to 50,000 in 2005, according to Eastern University of Kentucky criminologist Paul Kraska, and have resulted in the deaths of 40 innocent people during that time, according to the Washington-based Cato Institute. Peter Guither, with Drug War Rant, places the number of innocents killed in “no knock” searches at 42.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/06/17/militarized-police-no-knock-searches-kill-innocent-people/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FOURTH AMENDMENT CURTAILED ONCE AGAIN</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/21/fourth-amendment-curtailed-once-again/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/21/fourth-amendment-curtailed-once-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2011 18:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Houston Criminal Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exigent circumstances]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fourth Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unreasonable search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warrantless home searches]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=598</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kentucky V. King: Warrantless Entry into Residence Reasonable When Exigent Circumstances Exist That Were Not Created By Police

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Billy Sinclair

The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution has historically protected Americans from unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement officials. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment has two long recognized clauses: First, the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures; and, second, the requirement that probable cause be established before a search warrant is issued. There are “exigent circumstances” to these two constitutional requirements which allows law enforcement officials to conduct warrantless searches when 1) there is possible imminent destruction of evidence; 2) a real threat to the safety of the general public or law enforcement officials exist; 3) the police are in “hot pursuit” of a suspect; or 4) there is a likelihood that a suspect will flee before law enforcement can obtain a warrant.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/21/fourth-amendment-curtailed-once-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>18</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Paradox that is The War on Drugs</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/04/09/the-paradox-that-is-the-war-on-drugs/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/04/09/the-paradox-that-is-the-war-on-drugs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Apr 2011 16:07:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chapter 59 forfeiture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drug trafficking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forfeiture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war on drugs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While Some Politicians Question Cost Of Incarcerating Drug Offenders, Big Money and Bigger Forfeitures Keeps Texas Tough On Drug Crime

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

An increasing number of states have abandoned the traditional notion that the best way to combat drug use and trafficking is through the costly practice of extended incarceration. The Wall Street Journal last month reported that Kentucky joined the ranks of South Carolina, Colorado and New York to enact laws that shift spending into less expensive and more effective rehabilitation and intensive drug testing programs. Delaware, Florida, Indiana, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania are currently considering bills that would reduce drug penalties and direct some drug defendants into treatment programs.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/04/09/the-paradox-that-is-the-war-on-drugs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE PURPOSE OF REASONABLE DOUBT IN CRIMINAL TRIALS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/11/the-purpose-of-reasonable-doubt-in-criminal-trials/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/11/the-purpose-of-reasonable-doubt-in-criminal-trials/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Feb 2011 18:09:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA exonerations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecutorial misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reasonable Doubt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Conviction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=545</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a recent post we discussed both the history and role of reasonable doubt in criminal trials. We noted and criticized the fact that Texas judges in criminal trials do not, per Texas Court of Criminal Appeals mandate, have to give jurors any instruction as to what constitutes “reasonable doubt.” This, we believe, is one of several reasons why Texas leads the nation in the wrongful conviction of innocent people.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/11/the-purpose-of-reasonable-doubt-in-criminal-trials/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CELL PHONES-TEXTS NOT SAFE FROM POLICE SEARCHES</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/07/cell-phones-texts-not-safe-from-police-searches/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/07/cell-phones-texts-not-safe-from-police-searches/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 21:01:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Drug Defense Attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cell phone search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DEA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[police search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[text messages]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=543</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The popularity of Short Message Service (SMS), text messaging, originated in Europe and Asia before captivating American cell phone users, according to a 2008 CBS News report. SMS’ sudden popularity was linked directly to cost: it was cheaper to send short text messages than to make an actual phone call. CBS News pointed out that it cost less than a penny to send a text message in 2008. Perhaps it was also the cost factor that caused Americans, especially the young, to fall “head on heels” in love with texting in 2008.  According to CTIA, the wireless industry trade association, Americans sent an average of 2.5 billion text messages per day that year, an increase of 160 percent over 2007. This SMS surge was fueled by teens between 13 and 17 who sent and received an average of 1,742 messages per month. And the SMS explosion in America did not escape the economic attention of the cell phone providers: the cost of sending and receiving text message increased by a whopping 100 percent during this same time period.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/02/07/cell-phones-texts-not-safe-from-police-searches/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>MISTAKEN IDENTIFICATIONS SENT TWO INNOCENT MEN TO PRISON</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/08/01/mistaken-identifications-sent-two-innocent-men-to-prison/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/08/01/mistaken-identifications-sent-two-innocent-men-to-prison/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 22:01:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Houston Criminal Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA exoneration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drugs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Innocence Project]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mistaken identification]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Murder]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=456</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Suggestive Police Procedures and Mistaken Identification Resulted in Two More Wrongful Convictions and Incarcerations, One for 27 Years

By: Houston Criminal Attorney John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Our criminal justice system is flawed. Its imperfections can be found in the 255 DNA exonerations of innocent offenders and the 138 people released from death row since 1973 in this country. But, paradoxically, its perfection lies in its willingness and ability to correct the imperfections brought about by human mistake. According to the New York-based Innocence Project, mistaken identification is the “greatest cause for wrongful convictions,” playing a role in 75 percent of the nation’s DNA exonerations. Twice this year we have posted pieces dealing with the dangers, and, yes, tragedies caused by, the mistaken pointed finger (here and here). ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/08/01/mistaken-identifications-sent-two-innocent-men-to-prison/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

