behaviour of the defendant, illegal possession of drugs, presence of drug in school and secretly carrying drug with approval or knowledge of the school administrator.
The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 "enacted the 100-to-1 quantity sentencing powder cocaine"; the law is strong enough to suggest the award of sentence. As per law, "possession of drugs i.e. cocaine is liable to five-year mandatory minimum prison sentence", the quantity specified in the law is 500 grams of powder cocaine. As per gathered evidence there is no law, which can protect the defendant from the imprisonment sentence (Martin, 2002).
The serious offence committed by the defendant is much beyond the possession of cocaine. The defendant possessed cocaine at a location which is considered to be righteous place. The possession of cocaine at schools and public location is serious offence than simple possession of cocaine. The important element relevant to this case also includes the non-availability of any argument, excuse or reason by the defendant which shall rescue her against the violation.
As per American Behaviour-Law, no one stands above the law enforcement agencies. The instruction of law enforcement agencies is binding, and any violation shall be considered unacceptable. The defendant misbehaved with the police officer, the defendant was abusive and her act of throwing bag towards the officer was sign of disrespect. As per law, the defendant shall be either send for voluntary service, if not she shall be counselled, and any such action in future shall be deemed intolerable, and the defendant can be taken into custody as per law. The law suggests that the defendant has no right to protest in front of police; however the defendant had the right to request the presence of her lawyer during investigation. From the quoted incident, it is evident that the behaviour of the police officer towards the defendant was normal and acceptable, therefore the response of the defendant towards