METH MANUFACTURING LOOPHOLE CLOSES OCT. 1

'Personal Use' Provision Dating Back To 1971 Legislated Out Of Existence

For the next six weeks or so, a small loophole in Nevada law makes it legal
to manufacture methamphetamine for personal use - sort of.

Apparently it all depends on when you get caught cooking up a batch of the
illegal substance, and how good your lawyer is.

But before local drug users get out their chemistry sets, law enforcement
officials want them to remember one thing: The inadvertent gap in the law
is extremely narrow, and it won't protect illicit chemists from felony
charges if they are caught holding, using or selling methamphetamine.

The loophole apparently dates back as far as 1971, when Nevada Revised
Statute 453.091 was crafted. In the law, it states in part that
"manufacture" does not include "the preparation or compounding of a
substance by a person for his own use."

Lawmakers removed that language with Senate Bill 204, which was signed by
Gov. Kenny Guinn on May 28. The new law takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Oct. 1.

Until then, though, it is expressly illegal to possess, sell or be under
the influence of methamphetamine, but it is technically not against the law
to make it for your own use. Timing is everything. If the police raid a
meth lab before any of the product has been produced, and the suspect can
prove in court that he or she was making the drug for personal use,
manufacturing charges might not stick.

As remote and somewhat ridiculous as that may sound, the imprecise language
has caused problems for at least one prosecutor in Nevada. Washoe County
District Attorney Richard Gammick said the loophole was raised during a
drug trial in Reno, and the court dismissed the case.

But such examples are extremely rare. "Normally we have product so it isn't
a problem," Gammick said.

No drug cases in Nye County have been impacted by the loophole, and Nye
County Sheriff Wade Lieseke doesn't expect any to be. For one thing,
Lieseke said it is "pretty hard" for a suspect to prove he was making
methamphetamine for personal use, since most labs are designed to churn out
far more than four grams of the drug, which is the legal threshold for a
trafficking charge.

And drug dealers usually aren't that smart anyway. Echoing Gammick's
comments, Lieseke said raids at suspected drug labs almost always turn up
at least some methamphetamine or marijuana, not to mention drug
paraphernalia and other items that can lead to charges. "It hasn't impacted
us," he said of the quirk in the law.

Meanwhile, methamphetamine production has impacted southern Nevada quite a
bit. Lieseke said it is easily the most prevalent "hard drug" around, and
it is second only to marijuana as the controlled substance most commonly
seized by police in Nye County. "It's the most pervasive drug in the
Western United States," he said, adding that the NCSO is in the process of
obtaining two large grants specifically to combat methamphetamine
production and use.

"The whole state is having a problem with it," agreed Gammick. "The problem
is, many of the ingredients are not illegal in and of themselves. In fact,
you can buy a lot of them during a trip to Wal- Mart."

Gammick went on to say that the cost of cleaning up methamphetamine labs,
which often requires the use of hazardous materials technicians, has begun
to take a toll on law enforcement agencies, particularly in rural areas.

And using the drug can be just as dangerous as making it. Compared to
marijuana, "meth is the much worse as far as the human body is concerned,"
Lieseke said.

As for the current loophole, Nye County District Attorney Bob Beckett said
it is merely the latest example of the sorts of problems, omissions and
conflicts that are sometimes created by well-meaning lawmakers.

Often, such loopholes go unnoticed until they are used in court by a
meticulous defense attorney, Beckett said. And even then, lawmakers are not
always very quick to fix their mistakes.

The problem with the state's drug law apparently has been around for more
than two decades. Beckett said he knows of another example of "sloppy
legislation" that has been on the books for at least 15 years.

That legal snafu concerns probation for convicted sex offenders. According
to Beckett, the law allows a sex offender to receive probation so long as
the criminal is given a clean bill of health from a state-approved
psychiatrist. One of the criteria for determining that an offender is no
longer a danger to the community is if he is willing to admit his guilt and
show remorse for his crime.

There's just one problem, Beckett said. The law does not account for a
defendant who enters a no-contest plea, which, by definition, is not an
admission of guilt. As a result, sex offenders who plead no contest cannot
receive probation because they have not admitted their guilt and therefore
cannot pass a psychological evaluation.

"It's been brought to the attention of the Legislature, but it hasn't been
changed," Beckett said.

SB 204 was introduced by the Senate Committee on Human Resources and
Facilities on behalf of the Nevada District Attorneys Association. Lieseke
said the NCSO would receive a summary of it and all the other new laws
approved during the recent legislative session. Those summaries are
presented to the department's training division for dissemination to the
officers on the street.