| § 18.2-265.2 |
NARCOTIC NEWS
Drug Law in Virginia 18.2-265.2
Drug Law in Virginia 18.2-265.2
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Evidence to be considered in cases under this article.
In determining whether an object is drug paraphernalia, the court may
consider, in addition to all other relevant evidence, the following:
1. Constitutionally admissible statements by the accused concerning the use
of the object;
2. The proximity of the object to marijuana or controlled substances, which
proximity is actually known to the accused;
3. Instructions, oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use;
4. Descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its
use;
5. National and local advertising within the actual knowledge of the accused
concerning its use;
6. The manner in which the object is displayed for sale;
7. Whether the accused is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the
community, such as a licensed distributor or dealer of tobacco products;
8. Evidence of the ratio of sales of the objects defined in § 18.2-265.1 to the
total sales of the business enterprise;
9. The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the community;
10. Expert testimony concerning its use or the purpose for which it was
designed;
11. Relevant evidence of the intent of the accused to deliver it to persons who
he knows, or should reasonably know, intend to use the object with an illegal
drug. The innocence of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as to a
direct violation of this article shall not prevent a finding that the object is
intended for use or designed for use as drug paraphernalia.
(1981, c. 598; 1983, c. 535.)
consider, in addition to all other relevant evidence, the following:
1. Constitutionally admissible statements by the accused concerning the use
of the object;
2. The proximity of the object to marijuana or controlled substances, which
proximity is actually known to the accused;
3. Instructions, oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use;
4. Descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its
use;
5. National and local advertising within the actual knowledge of the accused
concerning its use;
6. The manner in which the object is displayed for sale;
7. Whether the accused is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the
community, such as a licensed distributor or dealer of tobacco products;
8. Evidence of the ratio of sales of the objects defined in § 18.2-265.1 to the
total sales of the business enterprise;
9. The existence and scope of legitimate uses for the object in the community;
10. Expert testimony concerning its use or the purpose for which it was
designed;
11. Relevant evidence of the intent of the accused to deliver it to persons who
he knows, or should reasonably know, intend to use the object with an illegal
drug. The innocence of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, as to a
direct violation of this article shall not prevent a finding that the object is
intended for use or designed for use as drug paraphernalia.
(1981, c. 598; 1983, c. 535.)