• 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.

Ms. Parrishon

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

pmarshall

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Wichita, KS

My son had a warrant for his arrest and he was charged with possession of marjuana, not on his persons. The warrant was for not reporting to probation officer. Should I get an attorney for him. Or is it necessary.
 


Ohiogal

Queen Bee
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Wichita, KS

My son had a warrant for his arrest and he was charged with possession of marjuana, not on his persons. The warrant was for not reporting to probation officer. Should I get an attorney for him. Or is it necessary.
YOUR SON should be the one getting an attorney for himself. He is going to jail most likely.
 

outonbail

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Wichita, KS

My son had a warrant for his arrest and he was charged with possession of marjuana, not on his persons. The warrant was for not reporting to probation officer. Should I get an attorney for him. Or is it necessary.
First of all, as a general rule, you, your son and everyone else in this country who is scheduled to appear before a judge, as a suspect in criminal proceedings, should always have an attorney present. Having an attorney on your side, will provide beneficial results about 99% of the time, as compared to not having an attorney. To what degree a person will benefit, is dependent on an infinite number of factors.
Since we have no way of knowing what it is your son is facing, I can only recommend that you look into the charges he's facing and try to determine the worse possible scenario, then decide if the cost of an attorney will offset what he's facing.

Generally, it is not cost effective to hire an attorney if someone is facing a possession of marijuana charge, when it involves a small amount and a first time offense.
This is certainly true in California, however I haven't researched the laws in your state to determine what penalties he may be facing. If you can post the actual code or statutes he has been charged with violating, we can research it further.

However, your post is a little confusing. Did he already get sentenced in the possession case and he has now violated the terms of his probation in that case?

If so, then you should look into the terms he was to abide by and determine what the consequences may be.
For example, did he agree to a deal where he would plead guilty, receive a sentence of lets say, two years in jail, with the sentence being suspended so he could be given the opportunity to complete probation, with the understanding that he must follow specific terms of his probation. (one of those terms being he must stay in contact and report to his probation officer on a regular basis) If he violates the terms of that probation, then he can be taken into custody and begin serving the two year sentence he originally received.
In a case such as I've described above, I would definitely recommend an attorney since an attorney may be able to pull some strings and get him another chance at completing his probation.
 

jeffadams

Junior Member
First of all, as a general rule, you, your son and everyone else in this country who is scheduled to appear before a judge, as a suspect in criminal proceedings, should always have an attorney present. Having an attorney on your side, will provide beneficial results about 99% of the time, as compared to not having an attorney. To what degree a person will benefit, is dependent on an infinite number of factors.
Since we have no way of knowing what it is your son is facing, I can only recommend that you look into the charges he's facing and try to determine the worse possible scenario, then decide if the cost of an attorney will offset what he's facing.

Generally, it is not cost effective to hire an attorney if someone is facing a possession of marijuana charge, when it involves a small amount and a first time offense.
This is certainly true in California, however I haven't researched the laws in your state to determine what penalties he may be facing. If you can post the actual code or statutes he has been charged with violating, we can research it further.

However, your post is a little confusing. Did he already get sentenced in the possession case and he has now violated the terms of his probation in that case?

If so, then you should look into the terms he was to abide by and determine what the consequences may be.
For example, did he agree to a deal where he would plead guilty, receive a sentence of lets say, two years in jail, with the sentence being suspended so he could be given the opportunity to complete probation, with the understanding that he must follow specific terms of his probation. (one of those terms being he must stay in contact and report to his probation officer on a regular basis) If he violates the terms of that probation, then he can be taken into custody and begin serving the two year sentence he originally received.
In a case such as I've described above, I would definitely recommend an attorney since an attorney may be able to pull some strings and get him another chance at completing his probation.
This is a great example of a well thought out and helpful answer to the OP's question, and what this site should be all about. Thanks outonbail.
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
This is a great example of a well thought out and helpful answer to the OP's question, and what this site should be all about. Thanks outonbail.
I don't suppose you've checked the old posts to see that this information has already been provided to the 10,000 other people who have asked the exact same question?

People who do the minimum amount of research on their own tend to get a LOT more help here. (Honestly, if they're capable of finding this site on their own, how much harder is it to click "search" before posting?)
 
This is a great example of a well thought out and helpful answer to the OP's question, and what this site should be all about. Thanks outonbail.
If you don't like this site, then you should visit Legal Help - ExpertLaw.com.

It's like the episode of Star Trek where Kirk beamed over to an alternate universe where good and bad were switched, and the bad Kirk beamed back to our universe. There are senior members over there with the same usernames as senior members here, except that they don't tear posters a new rectum when step-parents use first-person plural pronouns.

Very disturbing.
 

Rushia

Senior Member
If you don't like this site, then you should visit Legal Help - ExpertLaw.com.

It's like the episode of Star Trek where Kirk beamed over to an alternate universe where good and bad were switched, and the bad Kirk beamed back to our universe. There are senior members over there with the same usernames as senior members here, except that they don't tear posters a new rectum when step-parents use first-person plural pronouns.

Very disturbing.
Only because we were told that we can't. Further, I've seen some very incorrect advice over there and I find that a lot more scary. For example: People seem to believe that children can be willed! :eek:
 
Only because we were told that we can't. Further, I've seen some very incorrect advice over there and I find that a lot more scary.
Are you suggesting a correlation between these two facts? That there would be an influx of knowledgeable people responding over there if only they were allowed to abuse the newbies to their heart's content?

Or conversely, that there would be an exodus of knowledgeable people leaving this site if abusing newbies were to be suddenly prohibited here?
 
Last edited:

Rushia

Senior Member
Are you suggesting a correlation between these two facts? That there would be an influx of knowledgeable people responding if only they were allowed to abuse the newbies to their heart's content?

Or conversely, that there would be an exodus of knowledgeable people leaving this site if abusing newbies were to be suddenly prohibited here?
No, I'm suggesting that most stepparents really don't understand their roles in the lives of the children and we can't even so much as look as if we're going to say it. People don't realize that they will hear much worse in a courtroom.

If you wish to continue the argument then please PM me.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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