Many different things can end up having a big impact in cases in which a person is facing charges of distributing drugs here in Wisconsin. This includes where the alleged drug distribution is alleged to have occurred. This is because, here in Wisconsin, distributing drugs in certain locations can lead to a person facing a higher max sentence than would typically be available for the offense of drug distribution.
Specifically, state law specifies certain locations that distributing drugs in can trigger an option for courts to up the max sentence for the distribution by up to five years. Now, this rule doesn’t cover the distribution of all types of drugs, but rather just covers certain specified drugs. A couple of examples of drugs that are covered by the rule are heroin and cocaine.
What locations trigger the option for upped sentencing? The list includes:
- Approved alcohol or drug treatment facilities.
- Community centers.
- Youth centers.
- Correctional facilities.
- Multiunit public housing projects.
- Schools (whether they be public, private or tribal).
- School buses.
- Publicly accessible swimming pools.
- Village/city/county/state parks.
- Scatter-site public housing projects.
Now, for the vast majority of these locations, the drug distribution doesn’t have to be directly on the premises to trigger the sentencing increase option, but can instead be in the vicinity of the premises. Specifically, for all the locations except the last one listed, distributing within 1,000 feet of the premises can meet the requirements for triggering the option (as a note, there are some added considerations when it comes to approved alcohol or drug treatment facilities).
So, evidence regarding location can be significant in drug distribution cases. Skilled drug defense attorneys understand that a wide range of different kinds of evidence can end up having big impacts in these types of cases. They can help those accused of drug distribution with analyzing evidence, understanding what the evidence brought forward in their case means for their options and addressing major evidence issues (such as issues touching on the admissibility or accuracy of certain evidence) in their case.