Federal Controlled Substances: An Overview

No image available
Federal law classifies drugs by “schedules,” defined in 21 U.S.C. §812. The statute establishes five schedules, which categorize different substances and their treatment under federal law.

Federal law classifies drugs by “schedules,” defined in 21 U.S.C. §812. The statute establishes five schedules, which categorize different substances and their treatment under federal law. Schedule I includes drugs or other substances with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse, with a lack of accepted safety for the use of such drugs. This definition encompasses 42 different opiates, 22 opium derivatives, 28 hallucinogenic substances, and substances containing cannabimimetic agents.

Schedule II includes drugs with accepted medical use subject to sever restrictions, with a high potential for abuse leading to psychological or physical dependency. Schedule II encompasses any remaining opiates or opium derivatives not included in Schedule I, 21 additional specified opiates, and injectable liquid containing methamphetamine.

Schedule III encompasses drugs with an accepted medical use and a lower potential for abuse, but with a risk of moderate or low physical dependance or high psychological dependence if abused. Schedule III includes amphetamine, phenmetrazine, methamphetamine in forms other than injectable liquid, methylphenidate, anabolic steroids, 10 types of central nervous system depressants, and certain quantities of narcotics containing codeine, dihydrocodeinone, ethylmorphine, or morphine.

Schedule IV covers drugs and other substances with a low potential for abuse, with accepted medical use leading to limited physical dependency or psychological dependency. Schedule IV contains 11 substances: Barbital; chloral betaine; chloral hydrate; ethchlorvynol; ethinamate; methohexital; meprobamate; methylphenobarbital; paraldehyde; petrichloral; and phenobarbital.

Schedule V drugs and substances have the lowest potential for abuse and can lead to limited physical and psychological dependency. These substances have accepted medical use in treatment. Schedule V includes substances containing small amounts of codeine, dihydrocodeinone, ethylmorphine, diphenoxylate, or opium.

21 U.S.C. §841 prohibits the manufacture, distribution, distribution, or possession with intent to manufacture, distribute, or dispense a controlled or counterfeit substance. The penalty for violating §824 is contingent on the amount and type of the controlled substance, with certain aggravating factors enabling steeper sentences.

The most severe penalties for drug offenses are associated with violations of §841(b)(1)(A). The minimum sentence for violations under §841(b)(1)(A) is 10 years’ imprisonment and increases to 20 years if use of the substance causes death or serious bodily harm, with a maximum sentence of life in prison under either circumstance. The statute also carries financial penalties, with a maximum fine of $10,000,000 for defendants who are individuals and $50,000,000 for defendants who are not individuals, such as corporate entities. When the offender has prior drug felony or violent felony convictions, the minimum sentence rises to 15 years’ imprisonment for one prior offense, and 25 years’ imprisonment for multiple prior offenses. Following the prison sentence, offenders are subject to a minimum of 5 years’ supervised release, which doubles to a minimum of 10 years for offenders with prior violent felony or drug felony convictions. Offenders are ineligible for parole under §841(b)(1)(A).

§841(b)(1)(A) covers eight different substances in particular amounts. The aforementioned penalties apply to any violation of §824 broadly that involves 1 kilogram or more of heroin, or a mixture containing heroin; 5 kilograms or more of coca leaves, cocaine, ecgonine, or a mixture containing any combination of the three substances; 280 grams or more of a mixture containing a cocaine base; 100 grams or more of phencyclidine (PCP) or 1 kilogram or more of a mixture containing PCP; 10 grams or more of a mixture containing lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD); 1000 kilograms or more of a mixture containing marijuana, or 1,000 or more marijuana plants; 50 grams or more of methamphetamine or 500 grams or more of a mixture containing methamphetamine; and 400 grams or more of a mixture containing of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide or 100 grams or more of a mixture containing any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propenamide.

§841(b)(2)(B) imposes less severe penalties, covering drug offenses punishable by between 5 and 40 years’ imprisonment, although in cases where the substance causes death or serious injury, the sentence increases, with the offender receiving 20 years to life. Individual defendants under this provision may face fines of up to $5,000,000, with non-individual defendants subject to fines of up to $25,000,000. The fine increases when defendants have at least one prior conviction for a violent felony or drug felony. After a prior conviction, the minimum sentence also increases to 10 years’ imprisonment, with a maximum sentence of life in prison. Offenders of §841(b)(2)(B) are similarly ineligible for parole and face a minimum of 4 years’ supervised relief following the prison sentence, which doubles for offenders with prior drug felony or violent felony convictions.

§841(b)(2)(B) encompasses the same list of substances as §841(b)(2)(A), but in smaller amounts. An offender violates §841(b)(2)(B) when the offense involves 100 grams or more of heroin; 500 grams or more of coca leaves, cocaine, ecgonine, or a mixture of any combination of the three; 28 grams or more of a mixture with a cocaine base; 10 grams or more of PCP or 100 grams or more of a mixture containing PCP; 1 gram or more of a mixture containing LSD; 100 kilograms or more of marijuana or 100 or more marijuana plants; 5 grams or more of methamphetamine, or 50 grams or more of a mixture containing methamphetamine; and 40 grams or more of a mixture containing N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propanamide or 10 grams or more of a mixture containing any analogue of N-phenyl-N-[1-(2-phenylethyl)-4-piperidinyl] propenamide.

§841 also provides penalties for schedules broadly. For offenses involving a schedule I or schedule II controlled substance, gamma hydroxybutyric acid, or 1 gram of flunitrazepam, the associated sentence is up to 20 years in prison, although the sentence increases to a minimum of 20 years if the substance causes death or serious injury. If the offender has a prior conviction for a felony drug offense, the maximum sentence rises to 30 years’ imprisonment, with extends to life in prison if the substance causes death or serious injury. These offenses, covered under §841(C), carry a fine of up to $1,000,000 for an individual defendant or up to $5,000,000 if the defendant is not an individual, which doubles if the substance causes death or serious injury. Anyone convicted under. Anyone convicted under §841(C) is ineligible for parole and faces a minimum of 3 years of supervised release after the term of imprisonment, or a minimum of 6 years of supervised release if the offender had a prior conviction.

Schedule III substances carry a lesser sentence, with a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment, which rises to 15 years if the substance causes death or serious injury. Fines for a schedule III offense are also lower, with a maximum of $500,000 for an individual defendant and $2,500,000 for a defendant who is not an individual. If the offender has a prior felony drug offense conviction, the maximum fine doubles, and the minimum sentence rises to 20 years’ imprisonment, or 30 years if the substance causes death or serious injury. Following the term of imprisonment, schedule III offenders face 2 years of supervised release, which doubles if the offender has a prior felony drug offense conviction.

Following the same pattern, schedule IV offenses are punished less severely, with a maximum sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment, followed by at least one year of supervised release. If the defendant has a prior felony drug offense, the maximum sentence increases to 10 years in prison, followed by a minimum of two years of supervised release. Schedule IV offenses are also fined, with a maximum of $250,000 for individual defendants and $1,000,000 for defendants other than an individual, which doubles if the offender has a prior conviction. Schedule V offenses are punishable by a maximum of one year in prison, with a maximum of four years’ imprisonment if the offender has a prior conviction. Supervised release is not mandated for schedule V offenses unless the offender has a prior conviction, in which case supervised release may not exceed one year. A violation involving a schedule V substance carries a fine of up to $100,000 for an individual defendant or up to $250,000 if the defendant is not an individual, which doubles if the defendant has a prior conviction.

§841 also has provisions directed specifically at marijuana. The section imposes a maximum term of imprisonment of 5 years when the offense involves less than 50 kilograms of marijuana. Such offenses are punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 for individual defendants and $1,000,000 for defendants who are not individuals. If the offender has a prior felony drug offense conviction, the maximum prison sentence and maximum fine both double. Offenders without a prior conviction face a minimum of 2 years of supervised release following the term of imprisonment, while offenders with at least one prior conviction face a minimum of 4 years of supervised release. Small amounts of marijuana are treated as simple possession under §844, with an associated sentence of up to one year in prison or a minimum fine of $1,000, or both. The sentence increases if the offender has prior offenses under the subchapter but cannot exceed more than 3 years or more than $5,000 in fines.

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case in the Northern District of Alabama, Middle District of Alabama, Southern District of Alabama, or any federal jurisdiction in the Eleventh Circuit, including Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, contact Joe Ingram or Joe Ingram Law, LLC at 205-335-2640. Get Relief * Get Results.

articles

Blogs

1 / 44
Appellate Courts: Arbiters of Justice

Appellate Courts: Arbiters of Justice

Explore how the justice system safeguards fairness through appellate review in United States v. Gregory, a federal drug trafficking case that reveals key protections for defendants and the power of appeals in correcting trial court errors.

read articles
David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

David Eugene Files and the Interplay of Ethics and Jurisdiction

In a case that made its way to the highest level of the state court system, the Alabama Supreme Court recently presided over an appeal beginning in Walker County. This case, Ex parte David Eugene Files, centers around a Rule 32 petition for postconviction relief. Files’ petition was dismissed by the Walker circuit court, with the dismissal being affirmed by the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

read articles
Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

Sufficiency of Evidence: Reviewing the Admissibility and Application of Evidence Through US v. Mapson

In a decision that affirms the admissibility and sufficiency of several distinct types of evidence, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently presided over an appeal that found its roots in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

read articles
Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

Are Courts Always Free to Divide Property in a Divorce?

How courts divide real property in a divorce. Learn more from Ingram Law, LLC.

read articles
Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

Till Death Do Us Part: Marital Property Division on Behalf of an Estate

In a case that demonstrates the limits of alimony awards, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently heard the case of Larry Shearry v. Christy Spivey, as personal representative of the Estate of Charlotte Shearry.

read articles
Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

Fultondale Alabama Municipal Courts: Charges, Penalties, and Why You Should Seek an Attorney

You are driving home late between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. You get pulled over because the police officer states you are driving over the line, driving too slow, have a head light out or you have a taillight out.

read articles
latest-news

The Crime of Stalking in Alabama

Another category of criminal offense in Alabama is stalking. Covered by Article 5, stalking includes offenses for stalking in the first and second degree, aggravated stalking in the first and second degree, and electronic stalking in the first and second degree.

read articles
Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

Navigating the Division of Marital Property: Lessons from Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown

In a case that demonstrates the intricacies of equitable division of marital property, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal from the Jefferson Circuit Court in Jefferson County. The case of Barbara Brown v. Ernest Brown illustrates the importance of maintaining a clear record on appeal and emphasizes the necessity of full disclosure when dividing marital assets.

read articles
Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

Navigating Legal Challenges; Brett Yeiter’s Fight Against a Death Sentence

In a case illustrating the tumultuous and complicated proceedings for challenging a death sentence, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently heard the appeal of Brett Richard Yeiter v. State of Alabama, stemming from Escambia County. Yeiter’s case underscores the critical need to adhere to procedural requirements, especially in cases involving severe sentences.

read articles
latest-news

Trademark Infringement: Causes of Action Under the Lanham Act

Federal trademark law is primarily governed by the Lanham Trademark Act, also referred to as the Trademark Act of 1946. The Lanham Act, codified in 15 U.S.C. §§1051 to 1127, covers a wide range of trademark issues including registration, maintenance, protection, and the creation of a federal cause of action for trademark infringement.

read articles
Navigating the Complexities of Marital Property Division: Catherine S. Cauthen v. Carey Lee Cauthen, Jr.

Navigating the Complexities of Marital Property Division: Catherine S. Cauthen v. Carey Lee Cauthen, Jr.

In a case that highlights the complex issues of marital property division during divorce proceedings, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently heard the appeal of Catherine S. Cauthen v. Carey Lee Cauthen, Jr. Arising from Baldwin County, this case addresses the appeals of both the husband and the wife, demonstrating the intricate nature of property classification and division through six main points of contention. If you need a Divorce Lawyer, Please contact us about your case.

read articles
The Battle for Exoneration: Charles McCrory and the Fight Against Outdated Scientific Evidence

The Battle for Exoneration: Charles McCrory and the Fight Against Outdated Scientific Evidence

In a case that highlights broader systemic issues in the American justice system, the United States Supreme Court recently declined to review a controversial Alabama murder conviction. At this stage, the case of McCrory v. Alabama has been tumultuous for a man who continues to maintain his innocence. The increasing public attention directed towards the challenges defendants face when seeking exonerations is creating legislative pressure for reform, offering hope for a more just future.

read articles
latest-news

Pretrial Matters in Federal Court: How to Make Bond, Detention Hearings, and other Pretrial Functions

18 U.S.C. §3154 describes the functions and powers relating to pretrial services. The statute includes 14 particular functions, and a broader clause allowing the performance of any other functions specified under the chapter.

read articles
latest-news

The Interplay Between Lesser-Included Offenses and Double Jeopardy: The Case of R.E.F. v. State of Alabama

In a case that provides important clarification about double jeopardy when certain charges were reduced to their lesser-included offenses, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over the appeal of R.E.F. v. State of Alabama.

read articles
The Time Limit of Jurisdiction: Insights from Ex Parte State of Alabama

The Time Limit of Jurisdiction: Insights from Ex Parte State of Alabama

In a case that clarifies the bounds of jurisdiction for mandamus petitions, the Alabama Court of Appeals recently heard an appeal arising from Mobile County. This case, Ex Parte State of Alabama, explores trial court jurisdiction time limits without a stay, defining when new judgments can be issued, and orders enforced.

read articles
The Child’s Best Interest: The Two-Prong Test for Parental Termination

The Child’s Best Interest: The Two-Prong Test for Parental Termination

In a case that illustrates the high bar for terminating parental rights in child custody matters, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal arising from Baldwin County. This case, W.C.M. v. M.P., addresses a mother’s efforts to terminate the father’s parental rights, highlighting the complex and sensitive nature of proceedings seeking extreme legal remedies.

read articles
180 Years: Analyzing the Appeal of Travis Eugene Wolfe

180 Years: Analyzing the Appeal of Travis Eugene Wolfe

In a case addressing multiple facets of criminal procedure, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over an appeal from DeKalb County. This case, Travis Eugene Wolfe v. State of Alabama, demonstrates the breadth of trial court discretion when compounding consecutive sentences, while exploring the procedural and evidentiary requirements forming the basis for Wolfe’s conviction.

read articles
Drug Crimes in Alabama Both State and Federal Charges

Drug Crimes in Alabama Both State and Federal Charges

In Alabama, drugs are everywhere, both recreational and illegal. Drug charges carry significant jail time for distribution and trafficking, Alabama also criminalizes a wide array of drug offenses. Drug possession and sale offenses are covered by §13A-12-210 to §13A-12-219 of the Alabama Code.

read articles
Evidence of Prejudice: Joseph Michael Wilson and the Importance of Supporting Both Prongs of the Strickland Test

Evidence of Prejudice: Joseph Michael Wilson and the Importance of Supporting Both Prongs of the Strickland Test

In a case highlighting the extensive requirements to succeed under a Rule 32 petition, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over an appeal arising from Madison County. This case, Joseph Michael Wilson v. State of Alabama, illustrates the high evidentiary bar that criminal defendants must meet when alleging prejudice arising from ineffective assistance of counsel, demonstrating the high level of deference courts give to attorneys when determining trial strategy.

read articles
latest-news

Mens Rea: The Importance of Proving Intent In a Criminal Case

If you have a Federal Criminal case, a State Criminal case, a Municipal Case or a Family Law case, contact Joe Ingram or Ingram Law LLC at 205-335-2640.

read articles
latest-news

Rape And Sex Crimes in Alabama

Alabama law criminalizes a variety of sexual offenses, the most severe charges being for rape and sodomy. Charges for rape and sodomy in Alabama are classified based on the degree of the offense. Rape in the first degree and sodomy in the first degree, governed by §13A-6-61 and §13A-6-63 respectively, are both classified as Class A felonies.

read articles
latest-news

Fraud In a Divorce: Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts

In a case that clarifies the court’s power to address acts of fraud, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal originating in Mobile County. This case, Ex parte Gage Bruce Roberts, addresses fraud in the context of a divorce judgment, emphasizing the court’s authority to handle such scenarios.

read articles
latest-news

Constitutional Standing and Proof of Intent: The Case of Johnnie Leeanozg DavisConstitutional Standing and Proof of Intent: The Case of Johnnie Leeanozg Davis

In a case that clarifies several principles of criminal procedure, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently presided over an appeal arising from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.

read articles
Double Jeopardy in a Single Trial: The Case of Altonio Spencer

Double Jeopardy in a Single Trial: The Case of Altonio Spencer

In a case that illustrates the interplay of Alabama’s sentencing laws, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently heard an appeal originating in Mobile County. This case, Altonio Spencer v. State of Alabama, explores the proper application of the Habitual Felony Offenders Act and clarifies the Double Jeopardy Clause’s applicability when one conviction is included within another.

read articles
latest-news

Federal Sex Crimes: Offenses, Penalties, and SORNA

18 U.S.C. Pt I, Ch. 109A covers federal sexual abuse crimes. Sexual abuse, codified in §2242, criminalizes three types of conduct. First, the section criminalizes using threats or fear to coerce another person to engage in a sexual act.

read articles
Definitions: Exploring the Effect of Statutory Language on Protection Orders

Definitions: Exploring the Effect of Statutory Language on Protection Orders

In a case that dives into evidentiary standards and proper applications of the law, a case arising from Lee County recently made its way to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals. In the case of P.T.S. III v. S.S., the Court reviewed an elder-abuse protection order, clarifying evidentiary requirements and addressing the relevance and applicability of the Elder Abuse Protection Order and Enforcement Act.

read articles
latest-news

Sex Crimes And Computer Crimes in Alabama

Sexual Offenses are also recognized based on their relationship to technology. §13A-6-111 criminalizes transmitting obscene materials to a child by computer, classifying the crime as a Class B felony.

read articles
latest-news

Concurrent Split Sentences: Interpreting Sentencing Guidelines in Alabama Criminal Cases

In a case that clarifies the permissibility of concurrent split sentences, the Supreme Court of Alabama recently presided over the case of Ex parte Courtney Rayshun Elston.

read articles
Revocation Procedure: The Delicate Relationship Between Criminal Procedure and Due Process

Revocation Procedure: The Delicate Relationship Between Criminal Procedure and Due Process

The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over an appeal from Marion County, affirming the enduring significance of procedural rights in revocation proceedings. This case, Brandon Colby Hayes v. State of Alabama, clarifies the procedural necessity of a formal revocation hearing for community-corrections placements, thereby extending the policy for probation revocation in this area.

read articles
latest-news

THCA: The Unaddressed Cannabinoid in Federal Hemp Legislation

Six years ago, the Hemp Farming Act of 2018 went into effect as federal law, legalizing certain marijuana derivatives as “hemp.”

read articles
FaceTime Testimony: The Procedural Limits of Audiovisual Technology

FaceTime Testimony: The Procedural Limits of Audiovisual Technology

In a case exploring the procedural side of child custody, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals recently presided over an appeal that began in the Cullman Juvenile Court in Cullman County. The case of T.S. v. Cullman County Department of Human Resources and D.W. delves into the admissibility of remote testimony under relevant Alabama law, which permits such testimony only under specific compelling circumstances.

read articles
latest-news

Murder, Manslaughter And Criminally Negligent Homicide in Alabama

In Alabama, there are three major criminal charges associated with homicide. The first and most severe is murder, governed by §13A-6-2 of the Alabama Code. Unlike some other jurisdictions, Alabama does not recognize varying degrees of murder.

read articles
Calls for Reform: Background Checks in the Case of Chrisopher Bauer

Calls for Reform: Background Checks in the Case of Chrisopher Bauer

Alabama law enforcement is facing calls for reform in their hiring process. The public response was inspired when FBI agent Christopher Bauer was convicted last month for sexually assaulting a minor while employed as a state trooper. Bauer’s sentencing, potentially facing life imprisonment, is set for the beginning of August. Bauer began working for the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency in 2019, after state police conducted “a full and thorough” background check. However, Bauer had been fired from the FBI in New Orlean’s the previous year due to allegations of sexual assault, harassment, and several other policy violations, with his victims providing harrowing testimony detailing the encounters. In spite of this record, Bauer was still able to gain employment with the Alabama state police, raising questions about the system of background checks and inter-agency communication practices currently in place.

read articles
latest-news

Definition of Domestic Violence

Domestic violence is a pervasive issue that manifests in various forms, affecting individuals regardless of age, gender, or socioeconomic status.

read articles
Demystifying the Burden of Proof: Lessons from Duarel Kelly’s Probation Revocation

Demystifying the Burden of Proof: Lessons from Duarel Kelly’s Probation Revocation

In a case emphasizing the importance of meeting the evidentiary burden in all criminal proceedings, the Alabama Court of Criminal appeals recently heard the appeal of Daurel Eugene Kelly v. State of Alabama, arising from Baldwin County. Kelly’s appeal underscores the high standard of proof required in probation revocation hearings, following the same principles as other criminal proceedings.

read articles
Domestic Violence Charges in Alabama

Domestic Violence Charges in Alabama

The Alabama Code also criminalizes specific violent offenses within the home and family. Alabama recognizes three degrees of domestic violence, criminalizing actions against current and former spouses, relatives, household members, and former and current romantic partners, with all three degrees covering different crimes against this same group.

read articles
Reversable Error: The Balance Between Prejudicial Evidence and Defendant’s Rights

Reversable Error: The Balance Between Prejudicial Evidence and Defendant’s Rights

In a case illustrating the importance of remedies for errors causing significant prejudice against a criminal defendant, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over an appeal originating from the heart of Montgomery County. This case, D.M.G. v. State of Alabama, explores the impact of an extraneous document on a criminal defendant’s trial, ultimately resulting in the grant of a new trial.

read articles
Previous Convictions Can Be Used Against You

Previous Convictions Can Be Used Against You

A previous conviction may be used when you testify in a criminal trial. Learn more from Ingram Law, LLC.

read articles
Safeguarding Rights: The Role of Evidentiary Rules in the Case of Toney R. Harvell

Safeguarding Rights: The Role of Evidentiary Rules in the Case of Toney R. Harvell

In a case that highlights the importance of evidentiary rules at trial, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals recently presided over an appeal arising from Madison County. This case, Toney R. Harvell v. City of Huntsville, explores Rule 404(b) of the Alabama Rules of Evidence, illustrating how evidentiary rules can serve as safeguards for defendants’ rights.

read articles
latest-news

The Crime of Kidnapping in Alabama

Kidnapping is only classified in Alabama using two degrees. The less severe offense, kidnapping in the second degree, is a Class B felony governed by §13A-6-44.

read articles
Human Trafficking and Elder Abuse Crimes in Alabama

Human Trafficking and Elder Abuse Crimes in Alabama

Human trafficking is also heavily addressed within the Alabama Code. Human trafficking in the second degree under §13A-6-153 is classified as a Class B felony, punishable by 2-20 years’ imprisonment. The offense requires an offender to knowingly benefit from participation in a venture for the purpose of servitude, or if an offender knowingly obtains control over another person for the purpose of servitude.

read articles
latest-news

The Case of Fred Plump: Alabama’s Battle Against Political Corruption Continues As Usual

In the conclusion of an intense and high-profile legal battle, former Alabama lawmaker Fred Plump was sentenced to one year and one day in prison, along with three years of supervised release and a $196,150.45 repayment of funds. The sentence reflects Plump’s involvement in a kickback scheme where public funds were diverted from their intended use for community service.

read articles
Rehabilitative vs. Periodic Alimony: The Necessary Findings

Rehabilitative vs. Periodic Alimony: The Necessary Findings

At the heart of Etowah County, a recent case made its way to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals, emphasizing the importance of strictly adhering to statutory requirements in divorce proceedings. This case, Nathan Wayne Jones v. Martha Dale Jones, illustrates this concept by analyzing of the alimony award in a divorce judgment and outlining the proper guidelines for awarding periodic and rehabilitative alimony.

read articles
The Crimes of Burglary And Robbery in Alabama

The Crimes of Burglary And Robbery in Alabama

Another major crime is burglary, categorized by varying degrees in Alabama. The most severe burglary charge is burglary in the first degree, governed by §13A-7-5. To commit an act of burglary in the first degree, the offender must knowingly and unlawfully enter or remain in a building with the intent to commit a felony, and must also be armed with explosives, cause physical injury to another, or either use or threaten to use a deadly weapon that the offender is armed with.

read articles

schedule a consultation

Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo
Joe Ingram Law Logo

Your path to get the right compensation starts here.