Mike Richards Charged with Possession of a Controlled Substance (Post 360)

[Eric Sachs]

Especially after a drug related arrest for controlled substances at a border station?

I think it's possible.. maybe not right now but at the end of this mess, for sure.

but I've yet to see anything that would indicate he would be banned based on the arrest/conviction. I'm not talking reports.. I'm talking statutes.

 

[Stimpythecat]

Yep. I doubt he was banned when the Kings terminated him. He may get banned if found guilty or if he pleads a misdemeanor, not get banned.

If he is banned and can't get a waiver, maybe there is a case.

It's a border entry point. Bans are immediate and there is no need for an arrest much less a conviction. No due process. Just the judgement of the border official can be enough.

And Richards was arrested which is far more of an objective bit of info than the officer's judgement.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Especially after a drug related arrest for controlled substances at a border station?

Detained on June 17th yet not charged until Aug 25th.

More importantly, during this time, if he was even banned, what damages did the Kings incur? Not future/potential damages. Actual damages that would justify a material breach?

 

[Stimpythecat]

I think it's possible.. maybe not right now but at the end of this mess, for sure.

but I've yet to see anything that would indicate he would be banned based on the arrest/conviction. I'm not talking reports.. I'm talking statutes.

(i) In general.-Except as provided in clause (ii), any alien convicted of, or who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of-

(I) a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime, or

(II) a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), is inadmissible.

Sec. 212 (a)(2)

 

[Dr Quincy]

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/us-deny-entry-inadmissibility-reasons-29715.html

That link says waiver not available for drug abusers.

I am still reading the statute.

From http://www.uspassporthelpguide.com/getting-a-passport-for-convicted-felon/

Under federal law 22 U.S.C. 2714, the U.S. government will not issue you a passport if you are convicted of a felony federal or state drug offense while using a passport or crossing international boundaries during the commission of that crime. They would also revoke any existing passport in these cases. This disqualification is in effect throughout the duration of your imprisonment in a jail, stay in a halfway house or parole.


The U.S. Secretary of State may also disqualify you if you have been convicted of a misdemeanor state or federal drug charges, except in cases of misdemeanor drug charges that involve only a first offense possession of a controlled substance. The Secretary of State can grant exceptions in humanitarian cases.

 

[Stimpythecat]

Detained on June 17th yet not charged until Aug 25th.

More importantly, during this time, if he was even banned, what damages did the Kings incur? Not future/potential damages. Actual damages that would justify a material breach?

according to the nolo link. If Richards is classified as a drug abuser, there is no waiver available.

Thus harm could be readily apparent.


A lot also depends on what Richards admitted to when arrested. That we do not know.

 

[Dr Quincy]

If a drug arrest (and not even a conviction, in fact, if you even have ever smoked marijuana according to some here) bars a Canadian citizen from ever crossing the border and working in the US...


..... does that mean the NY Rangers signed a UFA this summer who will not be able to report to camp? Or do you think that they know the rules better than HF posters and realize that a minor drug offense most likely won't bar an athlete from playing in a major sports league?

 

[Stimpythecat]

From http://www.uspassporthelpguide.com/getting-a-passport-for-convicted-felon/

Under federal law 22 U.S.C. 2714, the U.S. government will not issue you a passport if you are convicted of a felony federal or state drug offense while using a passport or crossing international boundaries during the commission of that crime. They would also revoke any existing passport in these cases. This disqualification is in effect throughout the duration of your imprisonment in a jail, stay in a halfway house or parole.


The U.S. Secretary of State may also disqualify you if you have been convicted of a misdemeanor state or federal drug charges, except in cases of misdemeanor drug charges that involve only a first offense possession of a controlled substance. The Secretary of State can grant exceptions in humanitarian cases.

Does not apply. Richards is not a US citizen and this specifically only refers to US issuance of passports to US citizens.

 

[Stimpythecat]

If a drug arrest (and not even a conviction, in fact, if you even have ever smoked marijuana according to some here) bars a Canadian citizen from ever crossing the border and working in the US...


..... does that mean the NY Rangers signed a UFA this summer who will not be able to report to camp? Or do you think that they know the rules better than HF posters and realize that a minor drug offense most likely won't bar an athlete from playing in a major sports league?

He was not convicted of drug offenses. That's the key difference And he may not have admitted to anything. The information is still put in his file though.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Does not apply. Richards is not a US citizen and this specifically only refers to US issuance of passports to US citizens.

You know, it's funny, I could have sworn that I've seen the Stones play in concert despite Mick and Keith both having drug convictions, and I know I saw Paul McCartney in concert despite a drug conviction.


I guess they didn't read nolo.

 

[Dr Quincy]

He was not convicted of drug offenses. That's the key difference And he may not have admitted to anything. The information is still put in his file though.

There have been some in here who have said that conviction doesn't matter, that just being charged is enough. If you read what I wrote, you'll see that.

 

[Stimpythecat]

There have been some in here who have said that conviction doesn't matter, that just being charged is enough. If you read what I wrote, you'll see that.

Stoll wasn't arrested at a border.

And a conviction isn't necesary if there are sufficient admissions plus any prior history.

 

[Dr Quincy]

Hmm Canadian athlete arrested for drugs at border. Was able to play and even enter the US for his HOF induction:

Fergie Jenkins wikipedia:

Jenkins achieved his 250th win against the Oakland Athletics on May 23, 1980. Later that year, during a customs search in Toronto, Jenkins was found possessing 3.0 grams cocaine, 2.2 grams hashish, and 1.75 grams marijuana. In response, on September 8, Commissioner Bowie Kuhn suspended him indefinitely. However, Jenkins' suspension lasted only two weeks before, in an unprecedented action, an independent arbiter reinstated him and he returned to the league.[11] Jenkins was not further punished by MLB for the incident, as he remained active until his retirement following the 1983 season

 

[Stimpythecat]

Hmm Canadian athlete arrested for drugs at border. Was able to play and even enter the US for his HOF induction:

Fergie Jenkins wikipedia:

Jenkins achieved his 250th win against the Oakland Athletics on May 23, 1980. Later that year, during a customs search in Toronto, Jenkins was found possessing 3.0 grams cocaine, 2.2 grams hashish, and 1.75 grams marijuana. In response, on September 8, Commissioner Bowie Kuhn suspended him indefinitely. However, Jenkins' suspension lasted only two weeks before, in an unprecedented action, an independent arbiter reinstated him and he returned to the league.[11] Jenkins was not further punished by MLB for the incident, as he remained active until his retirement following the 1983 season

1980. Prior to 9/11. Enormous differnce.

Drug and immigration laws have significantly changed.

 

[Stimpythecat]

You know, it's funny, I could have sworn that I've seen the Stones play in concert despite Mick and Keith both having drug convictions, and I know I saw Paul McCartney in concert despite a drug conviction.


I guess they didn't read nolo.

What were their drug convictions? There are specific exceptions for marijuana. Plus were they aressted at a border?

Border shenanigans are treated much more severely than stuff away from a border.

 

[Dr Quincy]

1980. Prior to 9/11. Enormous differnce.

Drug and immigration laws have significantly changed.

Yet even after 9-11, and despite having a drug bust involving cocaine and hashish, he is able to live in the US and travel freely.

 

[Stimpythecat]

Yet even after 9-11, and despite having a drug bust involving cocaine and hashish, he is able to live in the US and travel freely.

Married to a US citizen.

Edit: also length of time since past arrests/convictions so determination was made under prior, more lenient immigration laws.

 

[mouser]

Entry ban information into the US is entered into the computer system immediately. That would happen on June 17.


Edit: and is separate from the visa process.



http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ied-entry-to-the-us-dont-panic/article626795/

Maybe I'm missing something here, but has there been any report that Richards was denied entry to the U.S. on June 17th, or any time after? The article states people are entered into the db after being denied entry to the U.S. Nothing about people who are charged in Canada while successfully entering Canada.

 

[Stimpythecat]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but has there been any report that Richards was denied entry to the U.S. on June 17th, or any time after? The article states people are entered into the db after being denied entry to the U.S. Nothing about people who are charged in Canada while successfully entering Canada.

I have not seen any. I posted that article to show that entry ban information is entered into the national database on the same day.

So some posters were saying that an entry ban determination would not be made immediately. That Canadian immigration lawyer says otherwise.


Edit: Sorry, I misread.
One of the links I posted specifically states that Canada and the US share criminal database information. This includes arrests, admissions, and other info. So Richards being arrested in Canada... the US border officials will know almost immediately.

 

[Mattb124]

Entry bans are immediate. And you quoted crimes of dishonesty which is something separate from controlled substances.

They are the same in terms of both being offenses which result in inadmissibility - ergo, not seperate in this context. Having read your various responses on this thread, it appears you are cherry picking to drive opinion.

Based on what I have seen on both sides of this argument, it appears likely the Kings will need to take a big bite of a turd sandwich in the coming months.

 

[tomd]

I have not seen any. I posted that article to show that entry ban information is entered into the national database on the same day.

So some posters were saying that an entry ban determination would not be made immediately. That Canadian immigration lawyer says otherwise.

But it also closes with a "don't worry be happy" that these things can get worked out. And if you don't believe that Richards has the best immigration lawyer in the province working on it as we speak then you are naive.

Bottom line, Richards is likely going to take a plea deal, get a nominal fine and maybe probation and no jail time. It will be the equivalent of a misdemeanor. The USA is not going to further punish him by essentially making it impossible to earn his $6 million salary. Just won't happen. It would be beyond pointless. Especially so because oxy is not as strigently punished in the USA as it is in Canada.

I appreciate that you are looking for all angles but this is a dead end. He will have no issues getting a visa to work in the USA.

 

[Stimpythecat]

They are the same in terms of both being offenses which result in inadmissibility - ergo, not seperate in this context. Having read your various responses on this thread, it appears you are cherry picking to drive opinion.

Based on what I have seen on both sides of this argument, it appears likely the Kings will need to take a big bite of a turd sandwich in the coming months.

I am not cherry picking. Statutes specifically treat them differently, therefore I am treating them differently.


Edit: And if you had read all my posts as you claim, you would have seen the statutes specifically treat them differently.

 

[stampedingviking]

I am not cherry picking. Statutes specifically treat them differently, therefore I am treating them differently.

Are you not looking at this as a crime committed in the US rather than Canada?

Some of your responses would seem to suggest this is so.

 

[Stimpythecat]

Are you not looking at this as a crime committed in the US rather than Canada?

Some of your responses would seem to suggest this is so.

As a result of 9/11, Canada and the US share criminal database information. The statutes I've posted also refer to violations or attempts to violate the controlled substance laws of foreign countries as grounds for inadmissibility.

I posted one such statute earlier on this page.

 

[Sagebuster]

Holy hell the amount of assumptions you make here.

It doesn't take too much effort to figure out what I'm saying. There is no explicit requirement for Richards to ever notify the Kings. All he has to do is submit to an evaluation by the doctors. It doesn't say that must be within 9 days or else. In all likelihood, waiting more than 9 days would still be reasonable.. and we don't know if he had already submitted himself or began that process before the Kings found out.

There's no 'office of a league substance abuse program doctor'.. it doesn't even say it's an in-person evaluation. Hell, it doesn't even say Richards himself has to ever even talk to said doctor.. it might just be as simple as sending records of the arrest over as they are made available. We don't know.. hence why it's foolish to try and use that as a basis for contract termination.

Where the **** did I say it would be kept secret from the Kings? If you can't see the difference between being required to tell the Kings and not being required to tell the Kings.. I don't know what to say. That's literally all I'm talking about here. Whether or not the Kings would ultimately find out is absolutely irrelevant.

My comment was a sarcastically literal interpretation of what you said in the comment I replied to. Here is the content of that comment:

There is no explicit requirement for Richards to notify the team and/or the substance abuse program. The wording is that he has to submit to an evaluation by the substance abuse program doctors after a drug-related arrest. That's all it says.

It doesn't say that has to happen within 9 days. It doesn't say he needs to tell the team at any point in the process.

If the Kings are relying on that clause, they aren't going to win. They have a better shot with the morality clause...

And here was my sarcastically literal reply:

So here is my interpretation of what you're saying. Mike Richards is obligated, after his being arrested, to show up at the office of a league substance abuse program doctor, but he doesn't have to say why he is there. Also, since no explicit time period is specified, Mike Richards could wait as long as he wanted. Then, you believe, Mike Richards evaluation by the substance abuse doctor will be kept a secret from the Kings. Is that correct?

While there is nothing in my comment that contradicts what you said, I shouldn't have posted that reply, but I was in a foul mood at the time. I appologize for letting my mood get the better of me.