Simple Possession In Louisiana

A Louisiana Hearing Committee has recommended that an attorney be reprimanded for a marijuana possession conviction and that allegations of unauthorized practice following her interim suspension for that conviction be dismissed.

The Respondent was not represented by counsel and proceeded Pro Se. This caused some problems because the Respondent proceeded with a narrative response and oftentimes such witnesses go astray and forget to go over all issues their testimony should cover and which an assisting counsel would make sure got into the record. The Hearing Committee is of the opinion that the Respondent was very forthcoming and believe that her testimony was truthful and credible. She was never evasive with any of her testimony or answers to questions posed by ODC and members of the Hearing Committee. Her testimony was straight forward and to the point and if she did not understand the question or needed some explanation regarding same, she asked and then subsequent to response proceeded to answer all questions in the same truthful and credible fashion.

The committee found she did not knowingly possess marijuana

Respondent gave detailed testimony regarding each of the two Counts set forth in the Formal Charges. Such testimony did not deny either of the Counts, but gave to the Hearing Committee an explanation for how such Rule violations were unintentional and in the instance of the Possession of Marijuana clearly without knowledge of the Respondent.

The committee quotes extensively from the testimony and finds as to the circumstances

The Hearing Committee is of the opinion that this specific Rule violation was not knowingly, intentionally or negligently committed. The Hearing Committee believes that on October 15, 2015, the Respondent’s motor vehicle was searched while legally parked in the Shreveport Marshal’s parking lot. That search revealed .2 grams of Marijuana in the center console of the vehicle and the Respondent was subsequently charged with Possession of Marijuana. The Hearing Committee, accepting the Respondent’s testimony as truthful and credible, believes that Mr. Danny Lawler, the owner of a local publication, The Inquisitor, upon realization that the Respondent had an outstanding moving motor vehicle violation encouraged the City Marshal to have the Respondent taken out of a City Court courtroom, where she was representing a client, and held in the holding cell, while the City Marshall obtained a search warrant and had the Respondent’s motor vehicle searched. The Respondent was representing a client in a lawsuit involving Mr. Lawler and his publication, and Mr. Lawler had threatened retaliation against the Respondent if she did not dismiss her client’s lawsuit, which she refused to do.

It was not hers

this Hearing Committee believes that the Respondent’s testimony was truthful and credible. The Hearing Committee believes that the Respondent took responsibility for the Marijuana in her motor vehicle to protect her little brother.

As to sanction for simple possession

The Hearing Committee found no cited cases in the Louisiana sanction jurisprudence that deal solely with a guilty plea conviction of a Respondent for the misdemeanor crime of Possession of Marijuana, with no other possible crimes or complicating factors.

The unauthorized practice was de minimus

For Count II no sanction be imposed for the Respondent’s negligent “technical violation” of Louisiana Rules of Professional Conduct…

(Mike Frisch)