Across the nation the war on drugs has been taken from the streets to doctor’s offices, with drug overdoses account for 16 deaths per 100,000 people living in the state. An estimated 116 million Americans are suffering from long-term battles with legitimate pain, but as more people are prescribed powerful painkillers abuse of that medication has become America’s fastest-growing drug problem. Locally, a 2010 report by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention listed Tennessee as the 8th state for prescription drug overdoses. Tennessee Highway Patrol Sgt. Greg Roberts said, “at a state level we’re finding it to be extremely difficult to do anything when these folks are carrying their own prescription meds.”

In response to this growing concern, Governor Bill Haslam has announced a new bill proposal that would require doctors and pharmacists to consult a controlled substance database before writing or dispensing prescription medication. This would eliminate the final loophole that enables patients with pain pill addictions to “doctor shop” in order to gain access to prescriptions. Furthermore, the bill would require pharmacists to consult the database each time they fill a prescription for a controlled substance and then again at regular intervals during treatment. The law as it stands now compels practitioners to enter a patient’s information and medication history into a database, however, they are allowed 40 days to enter the data. The new bill would give law enforcement more access to the state’s prescription drug monitoring database and improve active monitoring of that database.

The legislature last year unanimously passed Sen. Ken Yager’s bill that imposed unprecedented regulations on pain management clinics. Tennessee law defines a pain clinic as a privately owned facility where more than half the patients are prescribed pain management narcotics for durations of more than 90 days. The new regulations, which took effect Jan. 1, require pain clinics to register with the Tennessee Department of Health, outlaw cash payments for treatment, a characteristic of pill mills, and require licensed physicians to be present in the clinics at least 20 percent of the time. A new proposal by Yager would require pain clinic doctors, but not other practitioners, to enter a reason in the database for writing a prescription for a controlled substance. The families of those who have died or still fighting addiction to pain medication are hopeful the new legislation will restore order to the medical community.

Sources
Pain pill epidemic takes its toll on Tennessee
Tenn. Striving to curb deadly pain pill epidemic
TennCare Spending More on Narcotic Prescriptions
States consider requiring physicians to use drug-monitoring databases

Posted By: Eston Whiteside

Under Tennessee Law, it is a Class D Felony punishable by imprisonment of 2-12 years for evading arrest when such actions create a risk of death or injury to innocent bystanders or third parties. A recent Tennessee case, State v. Winters, requires the prosecution to prove this risk. In such case, the Defendant fled from Police, ran through a stop sign, yet there were no other vehicles near the intersection and no bystanders along the route. The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals thereby reversed the conviction for Evading Arrest with risk of death or serious bodily to innocent bystanders or third parties.

Some thirty years ago, Tennessee lawmakers first introduced laws now found in Tennessee Code Annotated 36-3-601 et seq. to protect citizens from being battered, abused, stalked, or otherwise harassed by spouses, former lovers, and even family members. The need for such laws is clear, but as with any good law there are those that will abuse the system.

It is not uncommon in Nashville for persons to attempt to manipulate the system by seeking and obtaining an order of protection against a spouse to gain an advantage in upcoming divorce proceedings. At other times, persons may rush to the courthouse first to seek an order of protection against an ex-boyfriend/girlfriend so as to beat the other party to the punch in an attempt to protect themselves against having one issued against them or even worse to protect themselves against criminal charges.

The scenarios described in the preceding paragraph are unfortunately not uncommon in Davidson County courts. Persons that have an order of protection issued against them (Respondents) are all too often viewed as suspicious at best before they ever get a chance to tell their side of the story as the Judge will have reviewed the written petition and heard the petitioner’s version of the events before they ever get to speak. This is why it is so important that the respondent has the most capable attorney that is experienced with these types of cases and prepared to clear the cloud of condemnation.

If an order of protection is sustained after a hearing then the order will be a permanent record that can never be expunged. The order will remain in place for one year and can be extended. The order immediately prohibits the Respondent from possessing a firearm. One must consider that if a person is evil enough to petition for an order of protection against you without just cause one time then such person could very well decide to make a false allegation again within the next year, which would immediately send you to jail. It is imperative to fight orders of protection at the first court date.

The only way for a person to protect themselves is to go to court prepared to defend the order of protection. If after a hearing the judge dismisses the order of protection then the incident is eligible for expungement. If you have questions regarding an order of protection contact Vince Wyatt or David Raybin at 615-256-6666.

Many people find themselves with criminal charges after a routine traffic stop. If an officer initiates a traffic stop, such officer will likely investigate for criminal activity.

If you find yourself arrested after a traffic stop, the first question your criminal attorney should be asking is, why did you get pulled over. If there is no legitimate reason for the stop, there may be no basis to prosecute you.

In a recent case in Tennessee that was decided in Federal Court, United States v. Gross, the court held that a slow lane change where the person’s vehicle straddled two lanes for a few seconds while changing from one lane to another without further erratic or improper driving does not give rise to a legitimate stop.