Behanan Charged with Marijuana Possession

Former UofL basketball player, Chane Behanan made the news, again.  This time it’s because he was charged with marijuana possession and receiving stolen property.  The property in question is an AK-47 rifle.

Police recently released a photo of the marijuana and two guns (the other is an AR-15).

Officers initially pulled over the vehicle Behanan was riding in due to a traffic violation.  Once they approached the car, they smelled marijuana and saw “residue” on Behanan.  These observations would have given police reasonable cause to search the vehicle.  That’s when the rifles were discovered.

As a Louisville criminal defense attorney, I’m going to raise a few issues.  First, the released photo of the items related to the stop may unfairly prejudice a potential jury.  The article is primarily about the fact that Behanan was charged with marijuana possession.  This clamoring for publicity directly establishes a link between the items and the charges in the public’s understanding.

However, no evidence has been released to prove the guns belonged to Behanan.  No evidence has been released to prove Behanan was under the influence when the car was stopped.  It may be possible to prove any residue in his system is purely due to the marijuana being smoked by another passenger.

One of the news stories goes on to explain that Behanan was dismissed from the basketball team due to a violation of team policy.  The reporter used another resource to include the comment that it was due to the results of a drug test.

Chane Behanan’s history with the University of Louisville is not in dispute, but it’s also not necessarily relevant to the current situation.

If you’ve been arrested and charged with marijuana possession, you have rights.  Don’t get railroaded because local media decided to run a sensationalistic headline.  By getting an experienced drug attorney involved as soon as possible, he may be able to prevent publicity, protect your privacy and your reputation.

This case hasn’t even gone to trial.  Why should someone be convicted before they’ve been afforded their Constitutional right to due process and counsel?