Drug War Issues
Politics & Advocacy
Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson announced Monday that people in Cleveland caught with pipes or syringes containing drug residues will no longer be charged with felonies. Under current practice in Cleveland, people caught with dirty paraphernalia are charged with felony drug possession.
More than 6,000 people were arrested on felony drug charges every year in the city. The mayor said he expected the change to reduce that number by from 1,200 to 1,500.
Under Jackson's proposal, it would take three dirty needle arrests to earn a felony drug possession charge. A first drug paraphernalia arrest would be charged as a second-degree misdemeanor and a second as a first-degree misdemeanor. People charged with either of those offenses could be diverted to Cleveland's drug court. A third offense would be sent to Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court and treated as a drug possession felony.
Jackson portrayed the measure as aimed at getting drug users into treatment without saddling them with a felony record as well as helping to improve the quality of life in the city. "If people have a couple chances, they better take advantage of it," the mayor said. "This is about helping people and stopping the behavior that is destroying our neighborhoods," he added.
Cleveland is the only large city in Ohio that routinely charges paraphernalia cases as felonies. Community activists there have argued for years that since similar cases in the suburbs are treated as misdemeanors, Cleveland residents have been treated unfairly.
But although tensions about racial disparity in Cleveland's drug war are simmering -- the Plain Dealer did a recent series on disparities in felony drug prosecutions -- Mayor Jackson attempted to tamp them down. Drug users come from all communities, he said, and suburban users would be treated just like inner city ones. "It's not a race issue," he said. "Everybody will be treated the same."
Well, that's progress, we suppose.
Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.
Comments
august
it seems this would encourage the sharing of needles since a addict wouldn't want to carry one around. don't prohibs know their son or daughter could sleep with an addict that was infected by a dirty needle.
In reply to august by Anonymous (not verified)
SMART
You seem to be smarter than any average legal eagle! It should be about harm reduction and not how many lives they can "save"! Prohibition has failed with prostitution, as well. That is, if you are a woman! Seems like the rich, and the well connected, (politicians' relatives) can get away with the crime, as seen in the news.
sorry
I messed up!
While the new charges
While the new charges (misdemeanor for first two times) are still not the wisest approach to drug use, they are an improvement over the past policy which was to charge someone caught with a used syringe or pipe with felony drug possession. Any drug addict (I am one, in recovery for 5 years) will tell you that not having that FELONY charge if they are busted would be a good thing, even if still not ideal. When decision makers move in our direction it makes no sense to criticize them for doing so. We can encourage and support these smaller changes, so our input will be valued on the broader issues as well. And I cant speak for Cleveland, but I can tell you that in Austin, TX- where having any syringe exchange program at all is against state law- the police do NOT stand outside the exchange looking to arrest users. I think blanket statements like the one you made are not helpful to our cause, the addicts affected most by these policies, or anyone at all. Lets deal in compassion and facts, not inflammatory rhetoric- it works better.
intent ???
since when can our police and our courts , start reading or minds. i see some charges are "the intent to". how in the hell do they know what that person intented to do with something before they even did it? that seems to me like people or being charged before they even commit a crime? please someone help me understand this new "law"
intent ???
since when can our police and our courts , start reading or minds. i see some charges are "the intent to". how in the hell do they know what that person intented to do with something before they even did it? that seems to me like people or being charged before they even commit a crime? please someone help me understand this new "law"
Add new comment