HomeMy WebLinkAboutA027 - model drug paraphernalia act drafted by Drug Enforcement Administration fi..
MODEL DRUG PARAPHERNALIA ACT
Drafted by the .l
t
Drug Enforcement Administration
of the
United States Department of Justice
August, 1979 `.
•r.
With p:
;r
Prefatory Note and Comments -
4,.,
..�3 �� �'� ��� � =�... � �. y:,.r#, .r _ �x�`�..�.�� � -�.�.. '�" '� n ?•�_w"-ytJl`�.`„7f"'t'�-'}�+"►r e�+r�*T'.'�°s�t att�pM+f'
-t� r � •- k � „Lr �.,a�'; � �"°" „} � p �'L f",y.';� 2 r �f „� 4 ... �" <.-.� a �.. '� i y x.rr"�
r :ti �1{"'T �r r�-.-c r t ='`Y 4 r- ,y3"'i i:fi.�� .t'a•, �x t . c �{ ';� -r I� �c: �� a -> i '� r-� f 'f ,�. '�.1 � j;�4
MODEL DRUG PARAPHERNALIA ACT
Prefatory Note
The Uniform Controlled Substances Act, drafted by the
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State
Laws, has been enacted by all but a-handful of states .
The Uniform Act does not control the manufacture, ad-
vertisement, sale or use of so-called "Drug Parapher-.
nalia. " Other state laws aimed -at controlling Drug
Paraphernalia are often too vaguely worded and too
limited in coverage to withstand contstitutional attack
or to be very effective. As. a result, the availability
of Drug Paraphernalia has reached epidemic levels . An
entire industry has developed which promotes, even
glamorizes, the illegal use of drugs by adults and
children alike. Sales of Drug Paraphernalia are reported
as high as three billion dollars a year. What was a small
phenomenon at the time the Uniform Act was drafted has now
mushroomed into an industry so well-entrenched that it has
its own trade magazines and associations.
This Model Act was drafted, at the request of state author- 1
ities, to enable states and local jurisdictions to cope
with the paraphernalia problem. The Act takes the'- form of
suggested amendments to the Uniform Controlled Substances
Act. The Uniform Act is extremely well-organized. It
contains a definitional section, an offenses and penalties
section, a civil forfeiture section, as well as miscella-
neous sections on administration and enforcement. Instead
of creating separate, independent paraphernalia laws, it
seems desirable to control Drug Paraphernalia by amending
existing sections of the Uniform Controlled Substances Act.
Article I provides a comprehensive definition of the term
"Drug Paraphernalia" and includes particular descriutions
of the most common forms of paraphernalia. Article I also
outlines the more relevant factors a court or other
authority should consider in determining whether an object
comes within the definition.
Article II sets out four criminal offenses intended to pro-
hibit the manufacture, advertisement, delivery or use of
Drug Paraphernalia. The delivery of paraphernalia to a
minor is made a .special offense. Article II clearly defines
what conduct is prohibited, and it specifies what criminal
state of mind must accompany such conduct.
Y
_
r
� �t r -';ems- � �� �te,� -^-�,^ a.rx�h.4�' r�vy¢'�. -�4s� ,-•-ar.,,�,,,`��+7��?. y L ai.�'k- t�� �, ?*r�s4#s>� � '���141t
{�,. Y i. fi#; t-�.�.�*+ t i '�;rx,ys��,i�k�.�s�..-�.'Fr-sd p�..j3•�"{,�� Z��:.r.��.1,.'-'' x.��� :ii'�, ''�'Y}'� � "�M.9 e„ j�,''.4 �'�.�,y
?f .r ; - � � -s-.•d.�. -?f f AA �, C )�.ac� {• f+�.. 1� •� i y�Y.
�-_ ,,,. :�'"s X fi...� ��."�+k� t .,� ,<� �+-a�..- .-;sr r-a ?•,- ���`�`r .� ��k a ':{�h a o.�- nc .E,�. �. r.J per' .. ?�' .��. .�lyw
;, ..:c �r: ';y `-S;."' +� � .ty-r�'' {� +,�'6ik Y5•'.r�4`! -�,. _� � .s.„_�.`�� �.,+Esf'. Y�. �., •��f� t.y.��lz 'WO��.?i3s'y��`Y
.... _a..# _ •r-tr- ti'$X `!�3.A �'?�-c3..� r.•=G: ��5.X! �o>�i'�,'._� r 4"f'����+"`__�"`',"_y.�„ '��'„•`t3. _. ,u=���".vt;'" i �' _}. �Y
E
ARTICLE I
(Definitions)
1 SECTION (insert designation of definitional section)
2 of the Controlled Substances Act of this State is
3 amended by adding the following after paragraph (insert
4 designation of last definition in section) :
5 " ( ) The term ' Drug Paraphernalia' means all equip-
6 ment, products and materials of any kind which are used,
'7 intended for use, or designed for use, in planting,
8 propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufac-
9 turing, compounding, converting, producing, processing,
10 preparing, testing, analyzing, packaging, repackaging,
11 storing, containing, concealing, injecting, ingesting,
12 inhaling, or otherwise introducing into the human body
13 a controlled substance in violation of this Act (mean-
14 ing the Controlled Substances Act of this State) . It
15 includes, but is not limited to:
16 (1) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for
17 use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing or
18 harvesting of any species of plant which is a con-
19 controlled substance or from which a controlled substance
20 can be derived;
21 (2) Kits used, intended for use, or designed for
22 use in manufacturing, compounding, converting, pro-
23 ducing, processing, or preparing controlled substances; x
24 (3) Isomerization devices used, intended for use,
25 or designed for use in increasing the potency of any
26 species of plant which is a controlled substance;
27 (4) - Testing equipment used, intended for use, or
28 designed for use in identifying, or in analyzing the
29 strength, effectiveness or purity of controlled sub-
30 stances;
31
(5) Scales and balances -used, intended for use, -
32 or designed for use in weighing or measuring controlled
33 substances;
34
(6) Diluents and adulterants, such as quinine
35 hydrochloride, mannitol, mannite, dextrose and lactose °
36 used, intended for use, or designed for use in cutting `
37 controlled substances;
38 (7) Separation gins and sifters used, intended
39 for use, or designed for use in removing twigs and
40 seeds from, or in otherwise cleaning or refining,
41 marihuana; '
42 (8) Blenders, bowls , containers, spoons and
43 mixing devices used, intended for use, or designed
44 for use in compounding controlled substances;
.-�'$ i- Yx � ,Ri. > <T.h:5"r'�. S t"�:�? . '�.rr" 'a '�x L#*�¢�'7.".�n�.•x.7"` i _}M y. ��.,��. 3 sl � i -3'e}� Y�.:�� +w.�w
[:y` t f. �Y 3 r"5;\.?. s ` 3 yF i� ) �.` x•i'4?�'�,. t�_ .+ t } 5-�*i
1 �, - �` .Sc z -s � • ^'�,_ft*:,,*C +i � t,..-�� �''e�•.3c`Yl L� 'i'F j ,; '-'„Ef^•� -�C' - "-53. ^n .L b •1 ,.. t-
`C. � #.r y s 7 ;::r ''�,kK $' d'+v �•�-. �.'�c{�R -V'"`_ ,.f Jry< -.t t"-t wS�p=. 9, +�r., +y •�
-> s� y T -. -*.+ -,�' �cf ,► ZY�wr� y �d. 7 h "r'L.'s. C � ^ L�^� 'mot- "�,,. � � "r y
> . � r.�: ak -.r..--,- r Syr y•s .�yL�x.. '�`�,,�`��� "i e.Y ��l•r`' .�t,-4 iB- -'s•s„-v��;;:� �,� 2je�, 4��;!. ..fir:
i ♦, � - _ +L_Lam`-F�..i' +F '-ice ill-A�. r2 3? .L- F'yn'0�� ? °f• 4 sG� .[�.- ` w .,-
_y +�,fs^!,y r 'x��`;a?^. �.. .G `+�sd�;f.-''2 - � C�:i"$ -i�` _ '.�?�-.'�.s.�-Y�t.�"�� ----.r`.. t__�:'+a."i`-�'_z ��-•x:'C;��tY:d�if' �:�.:� '_�
t
45 • (9) Capsules , balloons, envelopes and other con- r
R
46 tainers used, intended for use, or designed for use
j 47 in packaging small Quantities of controlled substances;
48 (10) Containers and other objects used, intended
49 for use, or designed for use in storing or concealing
50 controlled substances;
51 - (11) Hypodermic - syringes , - needles and other
52 objects used, intended- for use, or designed for use
53 in parenterally injecting controlled substances into
54 the human body;
55 . (12) Objects used, intended for use, or designed
56 for use in ingesting, inhaling, or otherwise intro- `
57 ducing marihuana, cocaine, hashish, or hashish oil -
58 into the human body, !
such as : _
59 (a) Metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone,
60 plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without E
61 screens , permanent screens, hashish heads, or
62 punctured metal bowls; j
63 (b) Water pipes; !
64 (c) Carburetion tubes and devices;
65 (d) Smoking and carburetion masks;
66 (e) Roach clips : meaning objects used to
67 hold burning material, such as a marihuana
68 cigarette, that has become too small or too
69 short to be held in the hand;
70 (f) Miniature cocaine spoons , and cocaine
71 vials;
72 (g) Chamber pipes;
73 (h) Carburetor pipes;
74 (i) Electric pipes;
75 (j ) Air-driven pipes; ;
76 (k) Chilluns;
77 (1) Bongs;
78 (m) Ice pipes or chillers;
79 "In determining whether an object is Drug parapher-.
80 nalia, a court or other. authority should consider, in
81 addition to all other logically relevant factors , the
82 following:
83 (1) Statements by an owner or by anyone in con-
84 trol of the object concerning its use;
85 (2) Prior convictions , if any, of an owner, or
86 of anyone in control of the object, under any State
87 or Federal law relating to any controlled substance;
r 88 (3) The proximity of the object, in time and
t 89 space, to a direct violation of this Act;
90 (4) The proximity of the object to controlled
c 91 substances; I
2
i i''�,.'tc►.e',3 A_'a�"',r+--�N�*'a xr* '^'�33�r,�--c�+hs.--.r y-�+.' 'ter -_:t� er�r?!� �!'-ree°iQ:,� nT�sc=s�r._y..x ,-.�^ .
Nf
92 (5) The existence of any residue of controlled
93 substances on the object;
94 (6) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the
. 95 intent of an owner, or of anvone in control 'of the-
96 object, to deliver it to persons whom he knows , or �.
97 should reasonably know, intend to use the object to
98 facilitate a violation of this .Act; the innocence of
99 an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as
100 to a direct violation of this Act shall not prevent
101_ a finding . that the object is intended for use, or
102 designed for use as Drug paraphernalia;
103 (7) Instructions, oral or written, - provided with
104 the object concerning its use;
105 (8) Descriptive materials accompanying the object
106 - which explain or depict its use;
107 (9) National and local advertising concerning its
108 use;
109 (10) The manner in which the object is displayed
110 for sale;
111 (11) Whether the owner, or anyone in control of
112 the object, is a legitimate supplier of like or related
113 items to the community, such as a licensed distributor
114 or dealer of tobacco products;
115 (12) Direct or circumstantial evidence of the ratio
116 of sales of the object (s) to the total sales of the
117 business enterprise;
118 (13) The existence and scope of legitimate uses k�
119 for the object in the community;
120 (.14) Expert testimony concerning its use. "
ARTICLE II
. .R
'j
(Offenses and Penalties)
1 SECTION (designation of offenses and penalties section)
2 of the Controlled Substances Act of this State is amended
3 by adding the following after (designation of last sub-
4 stantive offense) :
1 "SECTION (A) (Possession of Drug Paraphernalia)
2 It is unlawful for any person to use, or to
3 possess with intent to use, drug paraphernalia to
4 plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manu- _
5 facture, compound, -convert, produce, process, pre-
6 pare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, contain,
7 conceal, inject, ingest, inhale, or otherwise
8 introduce into the human body a controlled substance
9 in violation of this Act. Any person who violates
3
...- ...,.-., <........_ _-+-Cy..,a.:.3...�•1 ;,rc_:v-,.r.,..mq,,.,��r .,..-,� x;^..{�.•-. ..-�wrm�:_:�x�.^_,:, sw. -.z.y"; vim:s.s»;e.�-•:?" 4?Y"`.�at
a�.-
f
.10 this section is guilty of a crime and upon con
11 viction may be imprisoned for not more than ( ) ,
12 fined not more than ( ) , or both. "
1 "SECTION (B) (Manufacture or Delivery of Drug
2 Paraphernalia)
3 It is unlawful for any person to deliver,
4 possess with intent to deliver, or manufacture
5 with intent to deliver, drug paraphernalia,
6 knowing; or under circumstances where- one rea-
7 sonably should know, that it will be used to
8 - plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manu:
9 -facture, compound, convert, produce, process,
10 prepare, test, analyze, pack, repack, store, con-
11 tain, conceal, inject, ingest, inhale, or other-
12 wise introduce into the human body a controlled
13 substance in violation of this Act. Any person
14 who violates this section is guilty of a crime
15 and upon conviction may be imprisoned for not
16 more than ( ) , fined not more than ( ) , or both. "
1 "SECTION (C)- (Delivery of Drug Paraphernalia to
2 a Minor)
3 Any person 18 years of age or over who
4 violates Section (B) by delivering drug parapher-
5 nalia to a person under 18 years of age who is at
6 least 3 years his junior is, guilty of a special
7 - offense and upon conviction may be imprisoned for
8 not more than ( ) , fined not more than ( ) , or
9 both. "
1 "SECTION (D) (Advertisement of Drug Paraphernalia)
2 It is unlawful for any person to place in
3 any newspaper, magazine, handbill, or other publi-
4 cation any advertisement, knowing, or under circum-
5 stances where one reasonably should know, that the
6 purpose of the advertisement, in whole or in part,
7 is to promote the sale of objects designed or
8 intended for use as drug paraphernalia. Any person
-9 who violates this section is guilty -of a crime 'and -
10 upon conviction may be imprisoned for not more than
11 ( ) , fined not more than ( ) , or both. "
ARTICLE III
(Civil Forfeiture) z ,
1 SECTION (insert designation of civil forfeiture section)
2 of the Controlled Substances Act of this State is amended
4
F�T' _Y"' .a���w-9' _"4G �',r-'�_ 4 N7 �`e�� ".['z�f'�•3_''�Cg3 P°aa �^}2"'.�,. .}e. .,,},�'}J� a f ."�..a {r
... �: �r � :.;°�i t'Y. c i�i..s��'}i.��4 _i:-5's¢�-i+►^ k3.r�:�.-.5° S ,; a'� �s'. .Y:. - i i.'i • : 1 ys i!'.�.
» • -�,.'Sj"Si� 1."'c.`S�a., ? ,.Ydr` - 3 ,w,� rR rY`��i. s��;; ,..' h'�-c. i, ..T _ 1 c �5 _��,_�� t� a �a Rr r;
• 3 to provide for the civil seizure and forfeiture of drug
4 paraphernalia by adding the following after paragraph
5 (insert designation of last category of forfeitable
6 property) :
7 " ( ) all drug paraphernalia as defined by Section
8 ( ) of this Act. "
ARTICLE IV
(Severability)
1 If any provision of this Act or the application
2 thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid,
3 the invalidity does not affect other provisions or
4 applications of the Act which can be given effect
5 without the invalid provision or application, and to
6 this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
E
f
4
5
3 �
COMMENT [ARTICLE I]
Drug paraphernalia laws are most often attacked
because they are too vaguely worded. They seldom exp3. ::�SxU
what is meant by the term paraphernalia. They do not
indicate whether it is the use, or the possession, or t-:
sale of paraphernalia that is prohibited. Moreover, t:=,ey
are usually silent on the criminal state of mind that . r;;=us;t
accompany the prohibited conduct. This deprives an iricl ivridual
of fair warning as to what the law forbids. It also v-e�-,s't.s
too much discretion in authorities to determine what p� --Dp•>erty
and what activities are controlled.
DEFINITION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
Article I of the Model Act, in contrast, defines "O-r°ug
paraphernalia" as equipment, products , and materials
intended for use, or designed for use, essentially, tag :pr-o—
duce, package, store, test or use illicit drugs. The owfor-ds
"equipment, products and materials" should be interpret ,&
according to their ordinary or dictionary meanings. ' '
can apply to many forms of movable, tangible property_
Real property, conveyances, monies , documents and into ring?.-ble _
property are, on the other hand, not meant to be inc h>�d
within these terms.
i Although this definition may appear too general -n
its wording, or too broad in its scope,. there are so uTr= Syr
forms of drug paraphernalia that any attempt to define-- thy--
term in more specific language would guarantee major 1 1Dcorp--
holes in the Act' s coverage. The courts have repeatecUZy
recognized that there are practical limitations in dryi_r3
legislation. Where the subject matter of a statute do,;F--:s rat
lend itself to exact description, the use of general Tsaage
does not make the statute unconstitutionally vague. MinA .-end
States v. Petrillo, 332- U. S. 1, 67 S.Ct. 1538 (1947) .
see United States v. Ryan, 284 U.S. 167, 52 S.Ct. 65 (: 1 9 1-A
To insure that innocently possessed objects are nio
classified as drug paraphernalia, Article I makes the 'kmic,>W.1edge
or criminal intent of the person in control of an obje-�,-t.- key
element of the definition. Needless to say, inanimate sD13J--j,4--acts
are neither "good" nor "bad, " neither "lawful" nor
Inanimate objects do not commit crimes. But, when an ,�1relct
is controlled by people .who use it illegally, or who i_n,-fte--ma
to use it illegally, or who design or adapt it for
use, the object can be subject to control and the peopL
r
6
i
i
.�s�W. rpr,_..-w. ...w.•u�' :F z _ 7 •-!b�""T"e"''..,�.,'e's71':4`T' K`.�"a'ns."'�`C -dss.9P°',''4f f:'.'=A[, �",.:�""`�FM1wR'3Y^�..:
•?'�>' .wry-S Ott-.�'7'3''. IFn'fl".`�2s..''ffe'. - 1 C'' _, t..
subjected to prosecution. Article I requires, therefore,
that an object be used, intended for use, or designed for
use in' connection with illicit drugs before it can be con-
trolled as drug paraphernalia.
Hinging the definition of drug paraphernalia on a
specific intent to violate, or to facilitate a violation
of, the drug laws also provides "fair warning" to persons
in possession of property potentially subject to this Act. ..
A statute is not unconstitutionally vague, if it -embodies
a specific intent to violate the law. Boyce Motor Lines,
Inc. v. United States , 342 U. S. 337, 72 S.Ct. 329 (1952) ; -
Screws v. United States , 325 U. S. 91, 65 S.Ct. 1031 (1945) .
- Consider the application of Article I to a spoon, a
hypodermic syringe, and a length of surgical tubing. Each
object has legitimate uses in the community. None is specif-
ically designed for illegal use. Thus, when these objects
are manufactured, delivered and possessed in lawful commerce,
they are not .considered paraphernalia. But, if these same
objects are assembled and used by an addict to illegally melt
heroin and inject it into his body, they become drug parapher-
nalia. As such they become forfeitable under Article III,
and the addict becomes subject to prosecution under Section A
of Article II.
Actual use of an object to produce, package, store, test
or use' illicit drugs need not always be shown. An object is
considered to be drug paraphernalia whenever the person in
control intends it for use with illicit drugs. This intent
may be a generalized one, not necessarily pinpointing a ; =4
specific time and place of future use. See Palmer v. State,
14 Md.App. 159, 286 A. 2d 572 (1972) . It can be proved directly
such as by admissions of the person in control, or indirectly
through circumstantial evidence. It should be noted that the
person in immediate control of an object need not intend to use
it personally in connection with drugs. It is enough if he holds
the object with the intent to make it available to persons whom y
he knows will use it illegally. See United States v. 2265
One-Gallon- Paraffined Tin Cans , 260 F. 2d 105 (5th Cir. 1958) .
Objects whose sole, or at least dominant purpose is to
produce, package, store, test or use illicit drugs are con-
sidered to be "designed" for such use. A rebuttable presump-
tion exists that these objects are intended for use for the
purpose for which they are designed. See Israel v. United
States, 63 F. 2d 345 (_3rd Cir. 19331 . As such, they are
7
w:
- a
� x
r
9
presumed to he drug paraphernalia. Isomerization devices
designed for use in increasing the THC content of marihuana
provide a good example.
COMMON FORMS OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
Article I includes a detailed description of common forms
of property that can fall within the definitionof drug Para-
phernalia if used, intended for use, or designed for use to
violate the drug laws. This list is not intended to be
inclusive. Several of these descriptions, such as "chillums"
and "bangs, " may seem foreign to the lay reader. Neverthe-
less, these terms are part of the jargon of the drug- culture
and are understood by both users and merchants of drug Para-
phernalia. They are not unconstitutionally vague. See f
Hydgrade Provision Co. v. Sherman, 266 U.S. 497, 45 S.Ct.
141 (19251 .
RELEVANT FACTORS IN CLASSIFYING PARAPHERNALIA
In addition to defining drug paraphernalia and describing E
the common forms, Article I sets out some of the more relevant
factors to consider in determining whether an object is para-
phernalia. The listing of these factors in the Model Act is
not intended to be peremptory; a court or other authority is
not obligated to hear evidence on, or to consider, every
listed factor. Rather, the factors have been included to
guide law enforcement officers, judges, and juries in their
determination of what is controlled. Providing guidance on
the practical application of the Act minimizes the risk of
arbitrary and descriminatory enforcement, sometimes associ-
ated with even the most carefully drafted statutes. See
Interstate Circuit, Inc. V. City of Dallas, "390 U. S. 676,
88 S.Ct. 1298 (19681 .
Conversely, the listing of these factors is not meant
to be inclusive. Any logically relevant factor may be
considered.
8 '
•;2- iE.s;.V' •y+y t _ 4T�1`�4f'I. ti +, S 3 r 4' L r ';.n( ? . � .,
• f a Y a t -tir-'r a _y1 �,.rf, £ ` �` �•„e��" .-'its; .y�4' i �Cz-ka� �t t.
* - r ire' .• Y. .y, _ �. ` rL..3 af, .•o.
- . t�� _ a.,. ...•-,r.^.e .4. c-. J. .- �.`# ,. _ 7r,h r.> T vz" � ... r'J...a..s._rti;_35.:.�c'•.f .e-.:?,�'.�r Xr-�-�� r .�:_t F,�,¢�1
CO.II�IEN'r [ARTICLE II]
POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
Section A makes it a crime to: (i) possess an object;
(ii) classifiable as drug paraphernalia; (iii) with the
intent to use that object, essentially, to produce, package,
store, test or use illicit drugs in violation of the Con-
trolled Substances Act of the State. Section A does not
make the mere possession of an object capable of use as drug
paraphernalia a crime. Section A does not make the mere • . .
intent to violate the drug laws a crime. It is the possession
of drug paraphernalia accompanied by an intent to use it to
violate the drug laws that Section A forbids. Innocent citi-
zens have nothing to fear from Section A.
It must be noted here that the activities of storing,
testing and using illicit drugs are not in themselves viola-
tions of either the Uniform Controlled Substances Act or the
federal Controlled Substances Act. But each activity neces-
sarily includes -the possession of illicit drugs, which is a
violation of both laws.
JIANUFACTURE OR DELIVERY OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
Suppliers who furnish goods or services knowing they will
be used to .facilitate a crime are not .immune from liability.
There are no legal obstacles to punishing suppliers who know-
ingly or recklessly aid their customers to commit crimes .
This is true whether the objects or services are restricted,
or peculiarly suited for illegal use, such as a still, a gun,
morphine or stolen goods . See Direct Sales Company v. United
States , 319 U.S. 703, 63 S.Ct. 1265 (1943) ; Backun v. United
States , 112 F. 2d 635 (4th Cir. 1940) ; Israel v. United States ,
63 F. 2d 345 (3rd Cir. 19331; Weinstein v. United States,
293 F. 388 (1 Cir. 1923) ; and Commonwealth v. Stout, 356 Mass .
237, 249 N.E. 2d 12 (1969) .
'r.
It is also true when the objects or services have wide-
spread legitimate uses in the community, such as sugar, rye,
yeast, grapejuice, rubbing alcohol or a telephone answering
service. See United States v. Ragland, 306 F. 2d 732 (4th Cir.
19621 ; Chapman v. United States , 271 F. 2d 593 (5th Cir. 1959) ;
United Ciga Whelan Stores Corp. v. United States , 113 F. 2d
340 C9th Cir. 1940 Vukich v. United States , 28 F. 2d 666
(9th Cir.- 19281 ; United States v. Burnett, 53 F. 2d 219 (W.D-.
Mo. 19311 ; and People v. Lauria, 251 Cal. App. 2d. 471 (1967) .
9
7 y s .» '�a .. 1 x - r-� yam.' •-X
I
The reasonableness of this rule is clearly expressed
in Backun v. United States :
"To say that the sale of goods is a
normally lawful transaction is beside
the point. The seller may not ignore
the purpose for which the purchase is
made if he is advised of that purpose,
or wash his hands of the aid that he
has given the perpetrator of a felony
by the plea that he has merely made a
sale of merchandise. One who sells a
gun to another knowing that he is buy-
ing it to commit a murder; would hardly
escape conviction as an accessory to
the murder by showing that he received
full price for the gun; and no differ-
ence in principle can, be drawn between
such a case and any other case of a
seller who knows that the purchaser in-
tends to use the goods which he is
purchasing in the commission of a felony.
In any such case, not only does the -act
of the seller assist in the commission
of the felony, but his will assents to
its commission, since he could refuse
- to give the assistance by refusing to
E
make the sale" 112 F. 2d 635 (4th Cir.
C19401 .
'Where are courts which have hesitatedito hold a
supplier guilty of conspiracy with, or. of aiding and abett-
ing a buyer. See United States V. Falcone, 311 U. S. 2051
61 S .Ct. 204 (19401; and United States v. Peoni, 100 F. 2d
401 (2 Cir. 1938) . A careful reading of these decisions
makes clear that they were based upon the court' s unwilling-
ness to hold a supplier equally responsible with a buyer
based simply upon the supplier' s knowledge that the buyer
intended to commit a crime. At common law, the punishment
is the same for the co-conspirator and the aider and abetter
as it is for the actual perpetrator. Nothing in these cases
suggests, however, that a supplier enjoys complete immunity
from punishment, or that a state cannot make the conduct of
the supplier a separate offense. See Note, Falcone
Revisited: The Criminality of Sales to an Illegal Enterprise,
53 Columbia Law Rev. 228 (1953Z.
10
Y�.
..,v.,- -_,,,,-c.. r.r,.,y.+..F -...-r> y+V r��r.T;.,es+r. ...�—O.K.'s .•,Fw.v».L. e=t"�"�,p` .A .::...r¢rarn�w>w.3+.......a�•--v.:rvzr-s�€^:."#.'R_";x v...-�or�a
y
Section B makes it a crime to: (i) deliver, possess
with intent to deliver, or manufacture with intent to deliver
an object; (ii) classifiable as drug paraphernalia, (iii)
knowing, or under circumstances where one reasonably should
know, that it will be used, essentially, to produce, package,
store, test or use illicit drugs in violation of the Controlled
Substances Act of the State. The term "deliver" has the same
basic meaning attributed to it by the Uniform Controlled
Substances Act; namely, the actual, constructive, or attempted
-transfer from one person to another, whether or not there is
an agency relationship. -The term "manufacture, " appearing in
the phrase "manufacture with intent to deliver, " is used in a
general sense to express the entire process by which an object
is made ready for sale in open commerce, including designing,
fabricating, assembling, packaging and labeling. See Danovitz
v. United States, 281 U.S. 389, 50 S.Ct. 344 (1930) .
The knowledge requirement of Section B is satisfied when a
supplier: (il has actual knowledge an object will be used as
drug paraphernalia; (iij is aware of a high probability an
object will be used as drug paraphernalia; or (iii) is aware
of facts and circumstances from which he should reasonably
conclude there is a high probability an object will be used as
drug paraphernalia. Section B requires a supplier of potential
paraphernalia to exercise a reasonable amount of care. He need
not undertake an investigation into the intentions of every ^.
buyer, but he is not free -Co ignore the circumstances of a
transaction... Suppliers of objects capable of use as parapher-
nalia may not deliver them indiscriminately. Since each element
of Section B must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, legitimate,
prudent suppliers will not be affected by this section.
y
ADVERTISEMENT OF DRUG PARAPHERISTALIA
Section D makes it a crime to: Ci) advertise an object;
(-ii) classifiable as drug paraphernalia; (iii) knowing, or under
circumstances where one reasonably should know, that the purpose
of the advertisement is to promote the sale of the object for
use, essentially, to produce, package, store, test or use illicit
drugs.
Only printed advertisements promoting the sale of objects
for use as paraphernalia are prohibited. The non-printed media, #
including radio .and television, is not affected. Printed matter
criticising the drug laws, - glorifying the- drug culture, glamor
izing the use of drugs, or providing information or instructions
on illicit drugs is not affected. The target of this Section is
commercial advertising,
11 PY^
,a
—".'•...- -•,pn_•...,.T,.,,.—a --.._� :,-.rra�--n;.a.._r-.., :vr-m!s. :; . �:»-v tioa. -T;s, eaTM, o<-a.ee• ...,y...-. 1'z�fc S".xw'3't ..7!�"".... ti'ew+�e� a i!.
. Y I
Unlike so-called "printer' s ink" statutes , which exempt
printers and publishers from their coverage, Section D con-
tains no exemptions . It applies to anyone who prints or
publishes paraphernalia advertisements , and to anyone who
causes these advertisements to be printed or published. For
this reason, it uses the general terms "any person" and "to
place. " !
The knowledge requirement of Section D- is satisfied when _
the person placing the advertisements - (i) has actual knowledge
it is promoting the sale of objects for use as drug parapher-
nalia; (ii) is aware of a high probability it is promoting
the sale of objects for use as drug paraphernalia; or (iii) is
aware of facts and circumstances from which he should reasonably
conclude there is a high probability the advertisement is pro-
moting the sale of objects for use as drug paraphernalia. .
Whether an advertisement promotes the sale of objects for use
as paraphernalia is to be determined from its content. Under
Section D, one need not look beyond the face of the advertise-
ment.
Section D does not compromise First Amendment rights . The
sale of objects for use as drug paraphernalia is made --illegal
by Section B, and Section D simply prohibits -advertisments
promoting these sales. Commercial solicitation of illegal'
activities is not protected speech. Pittsburgh Press Co. v.
Pittsburgh Commission on Human Rights, 413 U.S. 376 , 93 S.Ct.
2553 1973 ; and see Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v.
Virginia Citizens Consumer Council , Inc.,, 425 U. S. 748-, 96 S.Ct.
1817 (1976) .
J
12 '
•s
-s:..•.+y�.T.sc.:a,.:+er.-..,r ..�_ ..;-•:�:..,N..-a-g .. 'wu'...�c s+c'.+_.. -:r. r•e,..:scg;�... •:+-•-.,.rr� 'r:.a,+,.�'-..w^xK?-'-i. rr -y;`,ai s. .ss,-r..-2.=:.
COMMENT [ARTICLE III]
Civil forfeiture actions are directed against property
and are totally independent of any criminal proceedings
against individuals. Section 505 of the Uniform Controlled
Substances Act provides for the seizure and civil forfeiture
of: (1) illicit drugs; (21 equipment and materials used to - s '
make, deliver, import or export illicit drugs; (3) containers
used to store illicit drugs; (4) conveyances involved in
transporting illicit drugs; and (5) books, records and. research _
connected with illicit drugs. States that have adopted Section
505 can seize these objects without making any compensation to
the owners . The legality of civil forfeiture statutes , similar
to 505 , and their usefulness in helping deter crime , have been
repeatedly recognized by virtually every state and federal
court, including the Supreme Court of the United States..
Calero-Toledo v. Pearson Yacht Leasing Co. , 416 U. S. 663,
94 S .Ct. 2080 (1974) . -
Article III extends the civil forfeiture section of the
Uniform Act to include drug paraphernalia. This allows states
to keep and destroy drug paraphernalia, rather than returning
it after criminal proceedings have ended. It also allows states
to keep drug paraphernalia seized during an investigation, in
cases where criminal proceedings are not initiated. Finally,
since the standard of proof in a civil forfeiture action is simply
"probable cause, " or "reasonable cause, " rather than "proof
beyond a reasonable doubt, " Article III permits states to
seize and forfeit drug paraphernalia in circumstances where
an arrest might not seem justified. For example, an officer
who encounters a minor in possession of a hypodermic syringe,
or in possession of a bong (a device especially designed for
smoking marihuana) , has reasonable cause to believe these
objects are intended for use to introduce illicit drugs into
the human body. Subjecting drug paraphernalia -to civil for-
feiture permits the officer to seize these objects, though
he decides not to arrest the minor.
Civil forfeiture can also be an effective deterrent to
commercial suppliers. See Utley Wholesale Company v. United
_ States , 308 F. 2d 157 (5th Cir. 19621 ; United States v. 2265
One---:Gallon Paraffined Tin Cans, 260 F. 2d 105 (5th (fir. 1958) ;
United States v. 1, 922 Assorted Firearms , Etc. , 330 F.Supp.
635 (ED Mo. 1971) ; United States v. 600 Bags of Southcoast
Jurbinado Brand Sugar, 225 F. Supp. 705 (WD La. 1964) ; Vinto _
Products Co. v. _Goddard, 43 F. 2d 399 (D Minn. 1930) ; and
United States v,. Roitman, 36 F. 2d 86 (ND Ill. 1929) .
13
- - ..F...,-.. ... _;e€�_AeT.�.. :;.�.9,r���.�?X'.e'ry"`'."z-".'- -�::Y. ..n�9.. .�s.;..?eo.4ri�e+a.w;m,.+.F�.-.wv..roF-.fa`�•"-t r""'_,`^^."�'+-�yya*`n9_'�'"¢'. i+-e'L,.".Y.
4.