judge this ...........

I grew up in his jurisdiction. He's convicted people I know. I'd like to know why.....

http://seguingazette.com/news/article_d9697848-5366-11e1-ad9c-001871e3ce6c.html?TNNoMobile

County judge arrested on marijuana charge

COLLEGE STATION - Guadalupe County Judge Mike Wiggins was arrested Monday night at a College Station hotel and jailed on a charge of possession of marijuana, less than 2 ounces.

Rhonda Seaton, public information officer for the College Station Police Department, said an officer was dispatched at 11:15 p.m. Monday to the Hilton Hotel, 801 University Drive East, in response to a call about the possibility of someone having marijuana at the hotel.

The police officer was met by a hotel security officer who said a bellman had reported the odor of marijuana on the fifth floor of the hotel.

The bellman and the police officer went up to the fifth floor and soon located a hotel room where the odor seemed to be coming from.

After the bellman knocked, the door was opened by a man later identified as Wiggins.

After doing a "protective sweep" of the hotel room, the police officer asked if there was marijuana in the room, and Wiggins pointed to a duffel bag. The officer asked if he could check the contents of the duffel bag, and according to the department's report, Wiggins consented to the officer's search of the duffel bag.

The officer said the bag's contents included a silver grinder, rolling papers and a plastic bag containing 20.1 grams of marijuana.

According to the officer, Wiggins confirmed it was marijuana and admitted it was his.

Wiggins was arrested on a charge of possession of marijuana, less than 2 ounces, and transported to the College Station Police Department where he was booked into the department's holding facility.

Seaton said all of the prisoners in the department's holding facility later were transported to the Brazos County Jail in Bryan. Magistrated on Tuesday, Wiggins was released after posting $3,000 bond.

Wiggins was attending the V.G. Young Institute: School for County Commissioners Courts scheduled Feb. 7-9 at the Hilton Hotel and Conference Center in College Station.

"There's nothing I can deny. It is what it is," Wiggins, a former DPS sergeant, said when contacted Thursday afternoon. He said he planned to be in his office Friday morning and would discuss the situation further at that time.

Possession of marijuana, less than 2 ounces, is a Class B misdemeanor punishable upon conviction by confinement for up to 180 days in the county jail and a fine of up to $2,000.

Precinct 2 Commissioner Kyle Kutscher is the current county judge pro tem who presides at commissioners court when the county judge is absent.

"I don't know how all this is going to play out," Kutscher said Thursday afternoon, noting that he had heard about the arrest of Wiggins only about 30 minutes before being contacted by the newspaper.

"I will wait and hold judgment until I talk to the judge," Precinct 3 Commissioner Jim Wolverton said.

Wiggins was re-elected in 2010 to a second term as Guadalupe County judge.

© 2012 Seguin Gazette. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed

Click to expand...

According to the county website he was PRESIDENT OF THE DPS OFFICERS ASSOC. This man needs to become a LEAP Spokesman

http://www.co.guadalupe.tx.us/guadalupe2010/home.php?content=co_judge

can I invite him to come be a judge in my county if they fire him?

there is one key thing i got from reading that post and it prolly proves more to me than anything anyone could say about him.

He is HONEST, and when it comes to being a judge hes got my vote.

It's his next move thats important to me. You can stand up for what's right, but something tells me hell choose a 30 day rehab

And this prick is sentencing fellow smokers what a hypocrite.

do as I say, not as I do

I hope he does as much time as the people he's sentenced.

fuckwad

This guy was a state trooper. Do you know how many people he put in jail for marijuana?
How about all the people in court this week on charges of marijuana??
As with all elected officials, one set of rules for you, another set of rules for me.

go away troll

He is only following the existing laws.

huh?

http://texasnorml.org/2011/12/ny-times-op-ed-piece-jurors-need-to-know-that-they-can-say-no/

[h=3]NY TIMES Op-Ed Piece: Jurors Need to Know That They Can Say No [/h]
Posted by Topher on 21 Dec 2011




[HR][/HR]
Here’s a wonderful piece by Paul Butler from the New York Times about your constitutional right to Jury Nullification. Remember that we, the People, still have rights when it comes to deciding what is fair and have the chance to be heard loud and clear.
“IF you are ever on a jury in a marijuana case, I recommend that you vote “not guilty” — even if you think the defendant actually smoked pot, or sold it to another consenting adult. As a juror, you have this power under the Bill of Rights; if you exercise it, you become part of a proud tradition of American jurors who helped make our laws fairer.
The information I have just provided — about a constitutional doctrine called “jury nullification” — is absolutely true. But if federal prosecutors in New York get their way, telling the truth to potential jurors could result in a six-month prison sentence.
Earlier this year, prosecutors charged Julian P. Heicklen, a retired chemistry professor, with jury tampering because he stood outside the federal courthouse in Manhattan providing information about jury nullification to passers-by. Given that I have been recommending nullification for nonviolent drug cases since 1995 — in such forums as The Yale Law Journal, “60 Minutes” and YouTube — I guess I, too, have committed a crime.
The prosecutors who charged Mr. Heicklen said that “advocacy of jury nullification, directed as it is to jurors, would be both criminal and without constitutional protections no matter where it occurred.” The prosecutors in this case are wrong. The First Amendment exists to protect speech like this — honest information that the government prefers citizens not know.
Laws against jury tampering are intended to deter people from threatening or intimidating jurors. To contort these laws to justify punishing Mr. Heicklen, whose court-appointed counsel describe him as “a shabby old man distributing his silly leaflets from the sidewalk outside a courthouse,” is not only unconstitutional but unpatriotic. Jury nullification is not new; its proponents have included John Hancock and John Adams.
The doctrine is premised on the idea that ordinary citizens, not government officials, should have the final say as to whether a person should be punished. As Adams put it, it is each juror’s “duty” to vote based on his or her “own best understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”
In 1895, the Supreme Court ruled that jurors had no right, during trials, to be told about nullification. The court did not say that jurors didn’t have the power, or that they couldn’t be told about it, but only that judges were not required to instruct them on it during a trial. Since then, it’s been up to scholars like me, and activists like Mr. Heicklen, to get the word out.
Nullification has been credited with helping to end alcohol prohibition and laws that criminalized gay sex. Last year, Montana prosecutors were forced to offer a defendant in a marijuana case a favorable plea bargain after so many potential jurors said they would nullify that the judge didn’t think he could find enough jurors to hear the case. (Prosecutors now say they will remember the actions of those jurors when they consider whether to charge other people with marijuana crimes.)
There have been unfortunate instances of nullification. Racist juries in the South, for example, refused to convict people who committed violent acts against civil-rights activists, and nullification has been used in cases involving the use of excessive force by the police. But nullification is like any other democratic power; some people may try to misuse it, but that does not mean it should be taken away from everyone else.
How one feels about jury nullification ultimately depends on how much confidence one has in the jury system. Based on my experience, I trust jurors a lot. I first became interested in nullification when I prosecuted low-level drug crimes in Washington in 1990. Jurors here, who were predominantly African-American, nullified regularly because they were concerned about racially selective enforcement of the law.
Across the country, crime has fallen, but incarceration rates remain at near record levels. Last year, the New York City police made 50,000 arrests just for marijuana possession. Because prosecutors have discretion over whether to charge a suspect, and for what offense, they have more power than judges over the outcome of a case. They tend to throw the book at defendants, to compel them to plead guilty in return for less harsh sentences. In some jurisdictions, like Washington, prosecutors have responded to jurors who are fed up with their draconian tactics by lobbying lawmakers to take away the right to a jury trial in drug cases. That is precisely the kind of power grab that the Constitution’s framers were so concerned about.
In October, the Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia, asked at a Senate hearing about the role of juries in checking governmental power, seemed open to the notion that jurors “can ignore the law” if the law “is producing a terrible result.” He added: “I’m a big fan of the jury.” I’m a big fan, too. I would respectfully suggest that if the prosecutors in New York bring fair cases, they won’t have to worry about jury nullification. Dropping the case against Mr. Heicklen would let citizens know that they are as committed to justice, and to free speech, as they are to locking people up.”
Paul Butler, a former federal prosecutor, is a professor of law at George Washington University and the author of “Let’s Get Free: A Hip-Hop Theory of Justice.”

Wow. Great article on JN.

Question: What if one is selected for Jury duty and they tell the other jurors of an option called 'Jury Nullification'?
Could that juror be charged with coercion or contempt by simply mentioning those 2 words?
-If that's true, than those 2 words are the MOST powerful -or- dangerous words on Earth!