You are on page 1of 3

PEANUT BUTTER FIRM

758 6 CHO CO L AT E ST REE T, S AL T L A KE C I T Y, U T 841 11


(8 01 ) 1 23 - 456 7| FR ON T DE SK @ PB FI R M.C OM

TO: MRS. OPHELIA OWNER


300 W. 556 N.
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84103

DATE: OCTOBER 18, 2017

SUBJECT: CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST JASON OWNER

Dear Mrs. Owner,

Introduction

We appreciate you for coming to our firm yesterday and discussing the issue with
us. Our firm is pleased to represent Jason Owner as our Client. The firm and other
assistances of legal team we will represent Jason Owner with the most effort way
possible. Which this letter is also to answer the two questions you had for us due to the
charges that are made against your son Jason Owner.

Facts

On August 23, 2017, Jason Owner and Dave Driver got pulled over by Officer
Chavez due to missed a stop sign. It was right after they had played in their high school
basketball team. During the traffic stop, the officer cited Dave and asked for the keys of
the vehicle (which the vehicle belonged to Dave Driver). Dave Driver, hands the keys to
Officer Chavez and he starts walking to the trunk of the vehicle. Then Dave yells at
Officer Chavez that he doesnt allow him to search his trunk. As the officer replies by
saying, This is standard procedure for this kind of violation. Thats when Officer
Chaves opens the trunk of the vehicle and notices five kilograms of crack cocaine in
small packages are there. Then Officer Chavez places Dave and Jason in the back of his
patrol car. Then Officer Chavez does additional searching and finds another kilogram of
crack cocaine in the vehicles glove compartment. After, Officer Chavez finished
searching Daves vehicle, he takes both Jason and Dave to the police station for
questioning.
As Jason was at the police station, he mentions to the officers that he did not need
a lawyer because he did not know the drugs were in the vehicle. As to Dave, he also did
not know of the drugs in the vehicle, but he was the only one with a key to the vehicle.
Jason was the only one who had ridden in the vehicle for the past few weeks. Also, as
they were in the back of the police car Jason asked Dave if he thinks they will find other
things inside the vehicle, which later Jason found out that in the patrol car of the officer
they had a system that recorded his statement. It could of effect that the officers might
relate that Jason knew of the drugs in the glove compartment.

Questions/Answers

1. Was the car search constitutional?

Issue

Our firm determined whether the car search was constitutional in case of Jason Owner of the
officer to search the vehicle.

Rule(s)

In the case of the United States v. Wald, 216 F.3d 1222, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 15860, 2000
Colo. J. C. A. R. 4202, it mentions that consent and probable cause. Consent, . . . . applies only
when the defendant initially gave a general authorization to search. Probable cause, . . . upon
which the government relies does not sufficiently corroborate a suspicion of contraband
possession to lawfully permit the trunk search. Jason and Dave dont show any probable cause
that give the officer to open the trunk.

Application

Since the evidence show that there was no probable cause during the traffic stop and Dave didnt
give consent to Officer Chavez to search the vehicles trunk. Then it wouldnt be standard
procedure for this kind of violation to be able to search the vehicle.

Conclusion

No, this wasnt constitutional for the officer to search the vehicle because demanding the keys of
the vehicle doesnt give consent to search.

2. Does the ten-year minimum prison term apply to the substance in the car?

Issue

Our firm determined whether the substance apply for Jason Owner to go prison for ten-year.

Rule(s)

The amount of crack cocaine found in the trunk of Daves vehicle doesnt give evidences that
they were distributing. In the case of United States v. Daniels, 723 F.3d 562, 2013 U.S. App.
LEXIS 14453, 2013 WL 3742493, mentions that they were distributing. Distributing means that
they are selling cocaine. Also, would show if they were distributing then the amount would be in
smaller packages with money nearby.

2
Application

The five kilogram or more of crack cocaine found in Daves vehicle shows no evidences of
distribution. What does show is that Dave is the only one who has a key to the vehicle, but Jason
has ridden in the vehicle for the past few weeks.

Conclusion

No, even though the evidence show Jason Owner, was riding in the vehicle in the past few weeks
doesnt show that he was distributing that amount of cocaine.