• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Failure to Produce

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

DTOM

Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Michigan

My grandson has been ordered to take weekly drug testing. I personally take him to the testing as he does not have a car. The second test he was ordered to take I took him in, it was close to closing time for the faclity. I picked him up from his work during his lunch hour. He went in for the test. When he came out he said that he has been able to urinate, but that the person at the center said they "thought" he had prodcued enough for the test. Now two weeks later he has been sent a notice from the court for show cause for failure to produce. He has never missed any of his testing which is random, he calls in each and every morning to see if it is his day to do, and has even gone back same day if he was unable to urinate. This was only the second time he had ever taken a drug test in his life and was having a hard time going in front of someone. But managed to go some. He is not having issues any longer. This testing was ordered by judge as a result of a reckless driving ticket that was reduced to careless driving. NO drugs were involved per the police report. Judge said if he missed any tests he would go to jail for 30 days. He didn't miss the test, he did produce, but was never told by the facility that the test in question did not produce enough urine. Question is will he end up in jail because of not being able to produce enough urine? Since that time he is also testing for another municipality twice per month for paraphanalia. So if he does go to jail will he be in violation of that probation? He is trying to straighen out and has even put himself into counseling. I am afraid a just 18 year old will end up in jail because he could not urinate enough. We don't have a lawyer, can't afford one. What can he expect at this hearing and would the judge take my statement that I am the one who drove him to the facility and waited for him.
 


calatty

Senior Member
Unless the judge abuses his discretion, he will not end up in jail for not being able to produce enough urine. Probation would not be wasting its time if it was clear that is what happened. There may be more to this story than you have been told.
 

DTOM

Member
The thing is he is not on probation. The judge added this as a condition of having a reckless driving ticket reduced to careless driving. No drugs were ever involved,even on police report. The court hearing was 7 months after the accident. So even the court appointed attorney was confused as to why this was added as a 30 day conditon. This was only the 2nd time he had to produce and he was having a difficult time going while someone watched him. He actually had went in earlier that day, paid and was unable to go, so they told him to come back. The only time he could go was during his lunch at work,he worked evening shift. He drank water on the way so he could go,since he had been at work for 3 hours and wasn't able to consume any liquid on the job, works retail floor stock. He is just now able to go in and produce without having a problem with someone watching him. He has just turned 18 and this is the only time he has been in trouble. Just hoping the judge will understand why he could not produce enough. Kid is so scared of ending up in jail for 30 days or at all. The person at the center simply said it should be enough for them to test. He has tested fine every time since, and I know that he goes every time because he no longer has a car since the accident and I have to personally take him.
 

DTOM

Member
Unless the judge abuses his discretion, he will not end up in jail for not being able to produce enough urine. Probation would not be wasting its time if it was clear that is what happened. There may be more to this story than you have been told.
He was not placed on any kind of probation. This was ordered due to having an accident, property damage only, hit a stop sign. Did not report the accident so charged with failure to report an accident and reckless driving which was reduced to careless driving. No drugs involved. He was held at police station for few hours but never arrested or charged with anything the the two tickets. Judge said he wanted to make sure he didn't use drugs and ordered the testing once per week for 8 weeks to make sure no marijuana use, period. No drugs were involved in accident. Hearing was 7 months after the accident. Court appt attorney even questioned why judge would order drug testing. Judge ignored her request as to what the reason was. As I said this was the second time he had ever been drug tested and he had already been there earlier in the day and could not produce due to nervousness, and being uncomfortable having to have someone watch him in a room that he has told us is mirrored on all 4 sides.that is why he went back later in the day. I guess we just hope this judge will listen, he has tested fine every time since and is no longer have issues with being able to go.
 

DTOM

Member
unless you went in with him, you don't know if he's blowing smoke up your skirt (lying) or not...js
Well, he went in twice that day to try to go and second time he was able to produce some urine,just not enough. He is going to the testing facility before court to get records if possible to show he was there twice. If anyone were trying to hide something, they wouldn't go twice in the same day to attempt to produce. He was told they though there was enough. Facility has been very understanding. JS. I would hope this judge who is known to be quite unfair would not put him in jail. He has complied every time since without much problem. My question would be how easy would it be for you to produce urine while someone watched you in a room that is mirrored on all four sides? Try it sometime. He has since gotten over the shyness, but this was only the second time he had went. The first time he had to go back three times in order to produce a sample despite having the urge to go.
 

quincy

Senior Member
DTOM, in which Michigan county is all of this taking place?

Was your grandson offered diversion to avoid a misdemeanor record?
 

calatty

Senior Member
He must be on some kind of court supervision or the court would not have the authority to order drug testing. Since your grandson was caught driving recklessly when he was already on probation for a drug-related paraphernalia charge, the drug testing condition was probably not objectionable. Like I said, there is your grandson's version and then there is the version of the officials doing the drug testing who have expertise in the urine testing field and have seen every evasive technique many times over. I'd be surprised if the judge buys a shyness defense from a male who must be used to urinating in front of other people in public restrooms. Your grandson can count on you to give him the benefit of the doubt, but he can't count on the criminal justice system to buy his excuses.
 

quincy

Senior Member
He must be on some kind of court supervision or the court would not have the authority to order drug testing. Since your grandson was caught driving recklessly when he was already on probation for a drug-related paraphernalia charge, the drug testing condition was probably not objectionable. Like I said, there is your grandson's version and then there is the version of the officials doing the drug testing who have expertise in the urine testing field and have seen every evasive technique many times over. I'd be surprised if the judge buys a shyness defense from a male who must be used to urinating in front of other people in public restrooms. Your grandson can count on you to give him the benefit of the doubt, but he can't count on the criminal justice system to buy his excuses.
calatty, what county in Michigan, and what judge in that county, is handling the grandson's matter can be important in Michigan.

Depending on the county involved, the grandson may find he will need an attorney in order to avoid jail time. Depending on the county and the judge involved, he may find that low-cost assistance is available to help him. Many attorneys offer payment plans.

There are some judges in Michigan who have been under fire in recent years for questionable decisions in cases involving minors. Diversion programs are often available for first time offenders (depending on the offense) but the requirements that have been ordered by some judges in some counties have been so onerous that they are impossible to meet within the probationary period. If all of the conditions are not met, jail time results.

Again, DTOM, if you can provide me with the county in Michigan where your son's case has been heard, I can perhaps provide your grandson with some resources in your area.
 
Last edited:

DTOM

Member
He must be on some kind of court supervision or the court would not have the authority to order drug testing. Since your grandson was caught driving recklessly when he was already on probation for a drug-related paraphernalia charge, the drug testing condition was probably not objectionable. Like I said, there is your grandson's version and then there is the version of the officials doing the drug testing who have expertise in the urine testing field and have seen every evasive technique many times over. I'd be surprised if the judge buys a shyness defense from a male who must be used to urinating in front of other people in public restrooms. Your grandson can count on you to give him the benefit of the doubt, but he can't count on the criminal justice system to buy his excuses.
He was NOT on probation. First time he was ever in any kind of trouble. If you cannot understand what I am saying then don't answer. He lives with us since he was 16 monhts old, so I would definitely know if he was on probation or had ever been in any other trouble. Believe me he is going to the testing facility Monday to get informationh. This is a young man who would NOT use the urinal at school all day long because he did not like it. Also, in men's urinals there are not mirrors on all four sides of you, nor is someone actually looking over your shoulder as you go, or I would assume. Again he WAS NOT ON PROBATION ,NO DRUGS WERE INVOLVED, JUDGE SAID HE FELT THAT RECKLESS DRIVING( reduced to careless) was good enough reason to ask for drug testing without the benefit of probation. which even the court appointed attorney thought was weird. He was just ordered to test for 8 weeks once per week. Can't tell you what the Judge was thinking. But this Judge has never been known for being rational .
 

I'mTheFather

Senior Member
He was NOT on probation. First time he was ever in any kind of trouble. If you cannot understand what I am saying then don't answer. He lives with us since he was 16 monhts old, so I would definitely know if he was on probation or had ever been in any other trouble. Believe me he is going to the testing facility Monday to get informationh. This is a young man who would NOT use the urinal at school all day long because he did not like it. Also, in men's urinals there are not mirrors on all four sides of you, nor is someone actually looking over your shoulder as you go, or I would assume. Again he WAS NOT ON PROBATION ,NO DRUGS WERE INVOLVED, JUDGE SAID HE FELT THAT RECKLESS DRIVING( reduced to careless) was good enough reason to ask for drug testing without the benefit of probation. which even the court appointed attorney thought was weird. He was just ordered to test for 8 weeks once per week. Can't tell you what the Judge was thinking. But this Judge has never been known for being rational .
Honestly, it's just better to ignore posts that don't apply to your situation rather than engaging the poster. It just ends up aggravating you. There's a handy little feature that you can use if you like. It's an 'ignore' option. I think it's in your user control panel.
 

DTOM

Member
Honestly, it's just better to ignore posts that don't apply to your situation rather than engaging the poster. It just ends up aggravating you. There's a handy little feature that you can use if you like. It's an 'ignore' option. I think it's in your user control panel.
Thanks You, didn't realize that
 

justalayman

Senior Member
He has never missed any of his testing which is random, he calls in each and every morning to see if it is his day to do, and has even gone back same day if he was unable to urinate. This was only the second time he had ever taken a drug test in his life and was having a hard time going in front of someone.
he never missed any of his testing

he has gone back the same day if unable to urinate

this was only the second time he had ever taken a drug test


there is a problem with those statements addressing the same person. The first two suggest he has taken several or more tests. The latter obviously is clear in its statement.



since it has only been two weeks since this test, if he has tested again, especially if multiple times, then I would suggest there is more to the story. Testing multiple times within 2 weeks suggests there is a serious issue the courts wish to keep a very close eye on.

but multiple tests since this may actually help him as they would give some credence to being clean on the short shot test.












Well, he went in twice that day to try to go and second time he was able to produce some urine,just not enough. He is going to the testing facility before court to get records if possible to show he was there twice.
Did he have to re-register when he went back in? If not, then it will not show he was there twice because he wasn't.
 

quincy

Senior Member
He was not placed on any kind of probation. This was ordered due to having an accident, property damage only, hit a stop sign. Did not report the accident so charged with failure to report an accident and reckless driving which was reduced to careless driving. No drugs involved. He was held at police station for few hours but never arrested or charged with anything the the two tickets. Judge said he wanted to make sure he didn't use drugs and ordered the testing once per week for 8 weeks to make sure no marijuana use, period. No drugs were involved in accident. Hearing was 7 months after the accident. Court appt attorney even questioned why judge would order drug testing. Judge ignored her request as to what the reason was. As I said this was the second time he had ever been drug tested and he had already been there earlier in the day and could not produce due to nervousness, and being uncomfortable having to have someone watch him in a room that he has told us is mirrored on all 4 sides.that is why he went back later in the day. I guess we just hope this judge will listen, he has tested fine every time since and is no longer have issues with being able to go.
I am sorry that my private message box was full, DTOM. I have now emptied it. Before my mailbox was full, though, I'mTheFather was able to send me a copy of your post that included the name of the county and the name of the judge. Thank you for providing the information.

First, in Michigan, District Courts do not have sentencing guidelines, so District Court judges have the ability to fashion their own sentences. This can be a good thing, and it is a good thing in many counties of Michigan. . . . .or it can be a bad thing (and it has been bad enough in some counties that judges in these counties have been investigated by the state for abuse of discretion).

It is this broad discretion given the judges in District Courts that can explain how your grandson wound up with the 8 weeks of drug testing for a non-drug or alcohol, careless driving ticket. In addition, this court has its own probation department, so random testing is often part of any order. In other words, the Judge in your grandson's case could order testing, and so he did.

If your grandson had to violate a law, he was lucky in many ways to violate it in the District he did. Drawing the judge that he did was also fortunate. The judge, despite what you may have heard, has been a fairly reasonable one.

The Judge will receive a notice that the sentencing terms were not complied with (ie, your grandson did not submit to the testing as ordered), and a hearing will be scheduled. Your grandson can explain to the judge what happened with the testing. He will probably want for the hearing a sworn statement from the testing facility, and one from you, which will be used to support his contention that he went to the facility as ordered but was only able to produce a small amount of urine (which later turned out to be not enough for testing).

There are some legal aid and pro-bono services in your area, if money for an attorney is an issue. There are also attorneys who offer payment plans.

I strongly recommend that your grandson consult with an attorney prior to the hearing. Good luck to him.
 
Last edited:

DTOM

Member
he never missed any of his testing

he has gone back the same day if unable to urinate

this was only the second time he had ever taken a drug test


there is a problem with those statements addressing the same person. The first two suggest he has taken several or more tests. The latter obviously is clear in its statement.



since it has only been two weeks since this test, if he has tested again, especially if multiple times, then I would suggest there is more to the story. Testing multiple times within 2 weeks suggests there is a serious issue the courts wish to keep a very close eye on.

but multiple tests since this may actually help him as they would give some credence to being clean on the short shot test.













Did he have to re-register when he went back in? If not, then it will not show he was there twice because he wasn't.
I don't think I was clear. He was ordered once per week random testing. He calls every day, if his color is up he needs to go in. The day in question was the second time he had to go in, first was on day of court. That day he had to return 3 times(during same day) before he could finally go. This one was 8 days later. When you go in you pay your fee, if you are unable to go at that time you are told to come back later in the day and try again. So, he has gone in each week since without missing and has not had a problem going. He has gone in 3 time since, once each week. No you dont re register, because once you only pay once for the test that day, no matter how many times you need to come in to be able to produce. This particular day he went in early afternoon, then had to go to work, and took him on his lunch which was at the end of the day for the testing center.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top