Homicide Charges for Drug Dealers — Yes!

Image credit: PsychoActif.org

by James A. Bacon

Governor Glenn Youngkin has told Southwest Virginia law enforcement officials that he would sign a bill charging drug dealers with homicide if they sold illegal drugs that resulted in an overdose death.

With the number of fatal overdoses exceeding 100,000 a year across the U.S., drug addiction is a scourge in Southwest Virginia. Washington County Sheriff Blake Andis says that fentanyl causes at least two overdoses per week in his county. The fentanyl epidemic, he told the Bristol Herald Courieris worse than the oxycontin epidemic. Southwest Virginia law enforcement officials believe the prospect of murder charges might deter drug dealers from selling fentanyl. 

A bill that would charge drug dealers with homicide passed the General Assembly in 2019 but was vetoed by former Governor Ralph Northam. According to media reports at the time, under Virginia law a drug dealer could be charged in the death of a customer only if the overdose happened at the time and place of the deal. There was usually a time lapse between the purchase of a drug and the overdose, so the law almost never applied.

In his veto message, Northam said, the bill “would expand the law to hold a person liable for felony murder without regard to whether the overdose was connected by time and place to the underlying felony. Essentially, a person would be criminally liable for murder even if the overdose occurred days or even months after the deceased received the drugs.”

Yeah, that’s pretty much the idea. That’s a feature, not a bug.

Northam added, “We must continue to focus on the biological, psychological, and social factors that foster addiction.” (See his full statement below.)

This is gibberish. Who was Northam even referring to? Was he referring to the overdose victim? I doubt addiction counseling services are going to do someone much good when he’s already dead from a friggin’ fentanyl overdose.

Or was Northam suggesting that drug dealers need addiction services, perhaps on the grounds that dealers often are addicts, too? That interpretation is even more absurd than the first. I don’t care if drug dealers struggle with drug addiction themselves. They bear responsibility for selling the drugs knowing full well that overdose is a risk.

My primary concern with the proposed legislation — which Northam might have been alluding to in his statement but did not say so explicitly — is proving that the drugs sold by a dealer were responsible for a buyer’s death. How does one establish that fact legally? How can it be proven that the buyer hadn’t bought the fatal drugs from someone else in the intervening time? Before endorsing the bill, I would like to be assured that safeguards are built into the law to address this issue. Drug dealers may be scum, but even they have due-process rights.

Assuming that the connection between a drug sale and an overdose can be established, I have no qualms about charging drug dealers with murder. If the prospect of being charged with homicide would give dealers second thoughts about lacing less potent drugs with fentanyl, I’m OK with that. But deterrence is a secondary issue: I deem it a moral imperative to hold dealers accountable for their actions.

The COVID epidemic, which has caused more than one million total deaths in the United States, prompted lockdowns and rules that turned the entire country upside down. The overdose epidemic has not claimed as many victims, but it is ongoing. There is no sign of respite. As a society, what have we done aside from wringing our hands? Precious little that I can see. I find the disparity in responses to be quite extraordinary.

If the homicide-charges-for-drug-overdoses bill has legal imperfections, fine, let’s address them and get the damn thing passed. The bill won’t stop the overdose epidemic, but it might put a dent in it. Without question, it will send a unmistakable message that Virginia is serious.


Northam’s full 2019 veto statement

“Pursuant to Article V, Section 6, of the Constitution of Virginia, I veto House Bill 2528. This bill would hold a person who gives, manufactures, sells, or distributes a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance liable for a crime of felony murder when a recipient of the controlled substance dies as a result of an overdose, resulting in a sentence of five to 40 years in prison. The person would still face a charge of distribution of the controlled substance, subject to a penalty of five to 40 years imprisonment. Currently, under Virginia law, a person is liable for felony murder if in the manufacture, possession, or distribution of a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance, another person dies, if that death is connected in both time and place to the underlying felonious conduct. This legislation would expand the law to hold a person liable for felony murder without regard to whether the overdose was connected by time and place to the underlying felony. Essentially, a person would be criminally liable for murder even if the overdose occurred days or even months after the deceased received the drugs. The disease of addiction has long devastated our communities. While I share the goal of addressing the opioid crisis and ensuring drug dealers are punished for supplying dangerous drugs, this bill goes beyond drug dealers and would punish individuals who are themselves struggling with addiction. The way to help individuals struggling with addiction is to ensure they receive proper treatment. We must continue to focus on the biological, psychological, and social factors that foster addiction so that those factors can be addressed and mitigated in order to save Virginia’s families and communities from the destruction of drug addiction. Accordingly, I veto this bill.”


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

25 responses to “Homicide Charges for Drug Dealers — Yes!”

  1. I found this picture at the same link Mr. Bacon got the image accompanying his article.

    I found it darkly humorous:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9a3e502507c308282d6ad853a9ccefec6167a0812ce34bd5c8a1a8e3d7fcb2a0.jpg

  2. My primary concern with the proposed legislation — which Northam might have been alluding to in his statement but did not say so explicitly — is proving that the drugs sold by a dealer were responsible for a buyer’s death. How does one establish that fact legally?

    That is the crux of the issue. Once the dealer and the customer part ways, it is extremely difficult to connect a particular drug overdose to a specific drug transaction.

    In fact, I can’t think of any way you could establish such a connection ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ unless the drug dealer/distributor confesses.

    1. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      Indeed, whether the street dealer/seller laced the substance is an evidentiary hurdle versus a wholesaler. Which of the two had knowledge?

      1. Lefty665 Avatar

        The potential for felony charges including homicide, even if hard to prove, could encourage the dealer to roll over on the wholesaler.

        1. I see your point. However, I’m not at all sure we should pass poorly conceived laws just because down the road the threat of them being used against one criminal bluffs him into turning on another criminal.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar

            I agree. That would be a side effect of legislation, not its purpose and available now with charges for dealing.

            I also agree with your other comments, especially that we each should bear primary responsibility for our own actions. In the case of OD resulting in death that penalty is severe.

    2. Matt Adams Avatar
      Matt Adams

      I would think the only way would be the crime lab compares the chemical fingerprint of what the customer OD’d on (assuming there is enough left for a comparison) with the stock of the dealer (assuming her or she hadn’t sold the entirety of it yet).

      1. Yes, but even if an indisputable chemical match could be made, and even if the user did buy drugs from the dealer whose product chemically matches the ‘fatal’ drug, who is to say the person did not get their fatal dose from a friend who happened to buy his drugs from the same dealer? Or maybe his friend talked him into using three times as much of the drug as his dealer told him he should use?

        And how far back do you go with the murder charges? Will the friend be charged? Will the dealer be charged? Will both the dealer and the friend be charged? What about the wholesaler and manufacturer?

        A some point people need to be held responsible for their own actions. If you choose to buy the illicit drug, you voluntarily ingest the drug, and the drug kills you, why should anyone other than you be held legally accountable for your death?

        It is a tragedy that some people die of drug overdoses. It is also a fact that if there was no demand for drugs, there would be no drug dealers.

        I’m in favor of stiff sentences for dealing heroin, fentanyl, etc., but in a free society where people have a right to due process I just don’t think we can come up with a legally workable process for charging a drug dealer with murder unless he was present at the death and had something to do with administering the fatal dose.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          “Who is to say whether the person used three times as much of the drug as his dealer told him he should use?”

          I don’t think that would matter, as they provided a scheduled substance that resulted in a death.

          “A some point people need to be held responsible for their own actions. If you choose to buy the illicit drug, you voluntarily ingest the drug, and the drug kills you, why should anyone other than you be held legally accountable for your death?”

          “It is a tragedy that some people die of drug overdoses. It is also a fact that if there was no demand for drugs, there would be no drug dealers.”

          I concur with this statement, but merely because the Federal Government is an attempt to be a Nanny has scheduled items which should not be scheduled.

          As a personal connection to something like this. I lost a family member to an accidental OD. He was given methadone by his fiancés grandfather, because he hurt his back at work. Methadone works slowly, so when one didn’t work he took two and that was 14 years ago.

          1. I am sorry for your loss. Losing someone close to you hurts no matter how the person died.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Thank you and yes it does. The pain never truly goes away, you just learn to live with it.

        2. Lefty665 Avatar

          It’s hard not to find contributory negligence on the part of the user, but it can happen. As in G. Floyd with enough fentanyl in his system to kill 3 people. In his case his dealer was in the car with him when the cops showed up and Floyd had a history of ingesting everything he was holding when the law arrived.

          It’s not like street drugs are being advertised. Oh, except for the Drugs Are Really Exciting (DARE) shows the cops put on and the schools made my kids attend.

    3. Lefty665 Avatar

      If you have enough evidence to connect a drug deal to a death why not charge the dealer with dealing before the death?

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        If they could then we could get the Sacklers too.

  3. In Virginia, the courts have addressed convictions for involuntary manslaughter in which they addressed the legal concept of willful, wanton and reckless indifference to human life being sufficient to sustain the criminal conviction.

    The standard is very difficult to prove in criminal prosecutions, but some convictions for involuntary manslaughter have been upheld on the basis that there was sufficient evidence at trial to allow the trier of fact to find the defendant acted with willful, wanton, and reckless indifference to human life. See, e.g., Tubman v. Commonwealth, 348 S.E. 2d 871 (Court of Appeals of Virginia, 1986) (although reversing the conviction for involuntary manslaughter in the case before the Court of Appeals, it discussed several Virginia Supreme Court decisions that addressed the issue of what constituted evidence of willful, wanton, and reckless indifference sufficient to sustain a conviction for involuntary manslaughter — some upholding the convictions, some reversing the convictions).

    The evidentiary burden of proof faced by Commonwealth Attorneys in cases involving charges of involuntary manslaughter are high — but not impossible to meet. It depends on the state of the available evidence in any particular case.

    Given the well-known and highly publicized lethality of fentanyl, it is possible for a Commonwealth Attorney to argue that a drug dealer acted with willful, wanton and reckless indifference to human life if the drug dealer knowingly (1) sells illegal drugs laced with fentanyl; or (2) sells fentanyl to a buyer who thinks he or she is buying another drug.

    If the Virginia General Assembly passes a law making the offense one of involuntary manslaughter instead of murder, it might pass muster in a Virginia criminal prosecution.

    Incidentally, part of the rationale used by Governor Northam to veto earlier legislation is flawed. Murder or manslaughter can be proven if the victim does not die at or shortly after the time of the criminal act — for example (1) person X deliberating and without justification shoots (or poisons) the victim with the intent to kill, but the victim does not die until hours or days later — person X can still be charged and convicted; (2) person X deliberately plants a bomb with the intent to kill, but uses a timer that detonates the bomb long after person X leave the scene — person X can criminally charged if one or more victims die as result of the bomb blast. Lapses of time between criminal act and criminally culpable consequence may complicate the job of Commonwealth Attorneys, but such lapses of times are not per se bars to criminal convictions.

  4. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    Sorry, I thought personal responsibility was a key theme for some of us. The dead user shares blame unless the drugs were forced upon them. This “reckless disregard” thing works both ways. Don’t put me on one of those juries, Mr. Prosecutor. I’m unlikely to convict on murder (on dealing, sure, max time….)

    1. LarrytheG Avatar

      Of course, it’s not necessarily your fault that you contracted a disease or have a “flaw” that makes you more susceptible to physical or mental disadvantages.

      But that still don’t make the supplier of what you are demanding – the main culprit. It’s the very essence of free market marketing.. to find out what people want and supply it per the demand. Got a bunch of fatties with that problem right now.. of course they don’t die from it right away. What got the cigarette companies was NOT that they were/are supplying a deadly product but rather their claim that they were not.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        A handful of folks have suffered a tragic loss to drug addiction. A boatload of us have loved ones killed by tobacco.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar

          yet no laws charging them with murder….

  5. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Sacklers too?

  6. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    You know full well that Northam was referring to providing additional counseling and treatment to addicts before they overdose.
    You did not tell the whole story regarding Northam’s action on this bill.
    Before vetoing the bill passed by the GA, Northam returned the bill with a recommendation that an attached substitute bill be adopted instead. Here is a comparison of the two bills:

    Description of the offense: Identical in both the GA bill and Northam substitute–homicide if a person’s death is the result of an overdose and the use of the drug is the proximate cause of death regardless of the time or place death occurred.

    Accommodation. The GA bill would have made it a Class 5 felony were distributed as an accommodation and not in order to make a profit. The Governor’s substitute did not have this provision.

    Summoning help–The Governor’s substitute would have made it a affirmative defense to prosecution if the person distributing the drug, in the event of an overdose, (1) summons help (2) remains on the scene until help arrives, and (3) identifies himself to law enforcement officer.

    In effect, the Governor’s bill would have let you off if you sold someone some marijuana laced with fentanyl and that person went into overdose and you summoned help, stayed around, and identified yourself to the cops. The House bill would have let you off with a Class 5 felony if you sold or gave the drug only as an accommodation with no intent to profit.

    The House of Delegates narrowly rejected the Governor’s recommended substitute. The Governor later vetoed the bill.

    It may make one feel good to support a murder charge for this offense and make good political points for the Governor, but I seriously doubt if the legislation, if passed, would have any deterrent effect. Under current law, anyone convicted of selling or distributing a Schedule I or II Controlled substance can be sentenced up to 40 years in prison. Upon a third conviction, one is eligible for a life sentence. Under the 2019 bill that passed the GA, but was vetoed by Northam, the sale of a drug that resulted in someone dying from an overdose carried a penalty of five to forty years in prison, the same penalty as that for distribution. It is hard to see any increased deterrent value there. See the history of that bill here: https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?ses=191&typ=bil&val=hb2528

    1. It may make one feel good to support a murder charge for this offense and make good political points for the Governor, but I seriously doubt if the legislation, if passed, would have any deterrent effect.

      Amen. And in my opinion that is reason enough by itself to refrain from further weighing down the Code of Virginia with a another new crime.

    2. Thanks for the additional legislative background. More context is always welcome.

      But I take issue with this statement: “You know full well that Northam was referring to providing additional counseling and treatment to addicts before they overdose.”

      Sure, additional treatment for addicts is desirable. But the bill in question deals with cases in which any such treatment would come too late because the addict is already dead.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar

        …. ” additional counseling and treatment to addicts before they overdose.”

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Well, as John Belushi would say, “8-balls for everyone!”

    Catherine Evelyn Smith was a Canadian occasional backup singer, rock groupie, drug dealer, and legal secretary. Smith served 15 months in the California state prison system for injecting original Saturday Night Live cast member John Belushi with a fatal dose of heroin and cocaine in 1982. Wikipedia

Leave a Reply