Wan'Dale Robinson cited for possession of marijuana

Bad2theBONES said:
Funny how everyone is saying poor education, and why they shouldn’t have consented to a search, etc. The law states police can search vehicles on campus and at high schools practically whenever they want. All they need is reasonable suspicion, which is a lot less of a burden to prove than probable cause. It is basically a hunch. 
Click to expand...
I would love for you to provide a citation for this.  

 
Mavric said:
I've listened to quite a few presentations on this topic, although they've all been looking at a K-12 school setting.  I have no idea if the same applies to post-secondary public schools but it would make sense that it would.

The Supreme Court case that set forth the "reasonable suspicion" standard for school investigation - as opposed to "probable cause" in the legal world - is New Jersey vs. T.L.O.  There is a quick overview here:
Click to expand...
This case is about juveniles at primary and secondary schools and searching their backpacks and alike.  This case does not cover adults and their vehicles at a college.  

 
A person clearly has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his dorm room, and I have a hard time thinking of how making contact in a dorm room would lead to a search of his vehicle, which I assume would be parked a considerable distance away and unrelated to the initial call. If there was probable cause, they could have gotten a warrant. I'm guessing Wandale consented to two searches (the room and the car) that he didn't need to. 

Obviously Wandale's biggest mistake was breaking the law and team rules in the first place, let alone in the same freaking dorm where his teammate just got busted and made headlines a few days ago. He should know better and he was being dumb. But then willingly giving up your rights on top of that was a critical error. 

I'm always on the side of law and order and strongly recommend cooperating with police, but you also need to know your rights. Declining to consent to a search and exercising your rights is not a sign of being uncooperative. However, I also understand that being a young black man in that situation, facing the cops in a new town,  probably added another element of uncertainty to the equation. It could have been avoided with better judgment in the first place (avoiding the weed). The young man needs some guidance at many levels.

Having said all that, I also think weed should be legal but regulated. There is a lot of potential nuance in this entire conversation.

 
Ulty said:
A person clearly has a reasonable expectation of privacy in his dorm room, and I have a hard time thinking of how making contact in a dorm room would lead to a search of his vehicle, which I assume would be parked a considerable distance away and unrelated to the initial call. If there was probable cause, they could have gotten a warrant. I'm guessing Wandale consented to two searches (the room and the car) that he didn't need to. 

Obviously Wandale's biggest mistake was breaking the law and team rules in the first place, let alone in the same freaking dorm where his teammate just got busted and made headlines a few days ago. He should know better and he was being dumb. But then willingly giving up your rights on top of that was a critical error. 

I'm always on the side of law and order and strongly recommend cooperating with police, but you also need to know your rights. Declining to consent to a search and exercising your rights is not a sign of being uncooperative. However, I also understand that being a young black man in that situation, facing the cops in a new town,  probably added another element of uncertainty to the equation. It could have been avoided with better judgment in the first place (avoiding the weed). The young man needs some guidance at many levels.

Having said all that, I also think weed should be legal but regulated. There is a lot of potential nuance in this entire conversation.
Click to expand...
+1. I think you accurately described a lot of reasonable nuance to this situation. Your third paragraph here is particularly poignant because let's be honest - not many 18-year-old kids are well-versed in their rights. I know I certainly wasn't at that age, and I also wasn't black or a division one college football athlete. I can only imagine what was rolling through his mind. Perhaps part of it was 'I better tell the truth and agree to whatever they suggest here so that I don't make my likely punishment any worse.'

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Huskers93-97 said:
Someone please just tell all the young guys living in the dorms to go over to an older players house and smoke with them in the living room. 
Click to expand...
If your clothes reek, just grab a tee from your teammate. And people think we have bad culture because of this....thats teamwork!!

 
Mavric said:
I've listened to quite a few presentations on this topic, although they've all been looking at a K-12 school setting.  I have no idea if the same applies to post-secondary public schools but it would make sense that it would.

The Supreme Court case that set forth the "reasonable suspicion" standard for school investigation - as opposed to "probable cause" in the legal world - is New Jersey vs. T.L.O.  There is a quick overview here:
Click to expand...
Hey...we covered that case in one of my grad classes!

Also...the courts pretty much always give the school a ton of room to find s#!t.

 
Frostberg said:
Edibles and oil would be felony charges in Nebraska. 
Click to expand...


Are you sure? I saw a shop selling CBD by Honest Abe's on 27th in Lincoln. I'm not drawing a comparison between what they sell and weed but it seems at least some oil or edibles are probably legal there. And yeah, it surprised me to see that in Nebraska.

 
JJ Husker said:
Are you sure? I saw a shop selling CBD by Honest Abe's on 27th in Lincoln. I'm not drawing a comparison between what they sell and weed but it seems at least some oil or edibles are probably legal there. And yeah, it surprised me to see that in Nebraska.
Click to expand...
The CBD oils being sold now don't contain THC, which is the component in pot which gets people "high".  As long as there isn't THC then it's legal with the federal gov't.

 
Not reading this entire thread because I can't stand all the awesome awesome takes on the evils of the marijuana, but looks like Robinson had less than an ounce.

He'll get a fine and that'll be that. 


 
JJ Husker said:
Are you sure? I saw a shop selling CBD by Honest Abe's on 27th in Lincoln. I'm not drawing a comparison between what they sell and weed but it seems at least some oil or edibles are probably legal there. And yeah, it surprised me to see that in Nebraska.
Click to expand...


https://jsberrylaw.com/blog/nebraska-laws-and-penalties-surrounding-different-forms-of-marijuana/

Possession of edibles, or consumable foods, teas or other products containing marijuana or THC concentrate are a Class IV felony in Nebraska, punishable by a maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment and a maximum fine of $10,000. Even one “pot” brownie may land you charged with a felony.
Click to expand...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top