Tag: Probation


Possession of Drugs While on Felony Probation [Washington County, OK]

Criminal Charge: Possession of Drugs While on Felony Probation
Case: State v. Henry Rivers
Court: [CF-05-323, Washington County]
Result: Straight probation


Mr. Rivers was charged with possession of CDS within 1000 feet of a park and false personation. Bartlesville PD arrested him while he was the passenger in a car. Incomprehensibly, the State attempted to use the driver as a witness against Henry – and released her pre-trial – even though she confessed at the scene that the bag containing eighteen packets of crack in the car console was hers and she was selling the crack…!

Originally represented by two other court-appointed lawyers, Mr. Rivers demanded a new attorney when he was offered 8 years in the penitentiary. The Oklahoma Indigent Defense System’s headquarters appointed Haslam.

Haslam immediately filed motions to dismiss the case. Arguing the long line of Oklahoma cases holding that “mere proximity” to drugs is insufficient to convict for possession [Hishaw v. State, 1997 OK CR 276, for example], Haslam persuaded the District Attorney he simply had no case. The State dropped the false personation charge, amended the drug charge to simple possession and Henry pleaded guilty and immediately walked out of jail with a 10 year suspended sentence.

This case should have been tried or dismissed completely because the law simply was not going to support either charge. However, Henry did not want to risk sitting in prison while appealing a bad jury verdict after spending eight months in the inhuman Washington County jail to fight these charges.

Case Dismissed

Probation Violation Dismissed [Tulsa]

Criminal Charge: Probation Violation
Case: State v. Decarla Ardrey
Court: [CF-00-6469, Tulsa County]
Result: Case Dismissed

Oklahoma State Courts Network
For more details on this case, open the Docket View.


Ms. Ardrey was incarcerated in a Louisiana prison and feared that Tulsa County would imprison her on an Oklahoma probation violation immediately upon her discharge of the Louisiana sentence. It appeared that Tulsa County was intentionally waiting to conduct her sentencing on the probation violation until Louisiana released her. This was going to prevent her sentence on the Oklahoma probation violation from beginning until she was released in Louisiana.

Haslam filed a motion urging the immediate return of DeCarla from Louisiana to Tulsa County to be sentenced. Rather than finance the return of Decarla to Tulsa County to be sentenced, then finance her return to Louisiana to discharge her sentence there, and then finance a second return to Oklahoma to begin her sentence on the relatively insignificant Oklahoma probation violation,Tulsa County very reasonably elected to DISMISS the probation violation case against her. DeCarla discharged her Louisiana sentence and never served a day on the Oklahoma probation violation.