Rene Perras: Welcome, everyone! My name is Rene Perras, legal news reporter for Coffee with Q, a platform dedicated to shedding light on crucial legal matters and discussions with subject matter experts who impact our society every day. Our aim is to educate and inform our audience through professional insights and analyses, making complex legal issues more straightforward and understandable.
Today, I want to welcome John. It’s great to have you here, and I’m sure our audience will benefit from your expertise as an attorney. You’ve handled many federal criminal defense cases and appeals, especially those involving controlled substances and illicit drugs. Welcome, John!
John Helms: Thank you. It’s good to be here.
Rene Perras: John’s expertise includes over 30 years as an attorney, with more than 25 years practicing as a Dallas criminal defense attorney. He also served three years as a federal prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Texas, where he never lost a trial or an appeal—truly impressive!
Let’s get started. Could you help our listeners understand the significance of drug quantity determination in federal cases?
John Helms: Sure. There are two ways in which drug quantity can affect a case. First, the federal charge you’re facing is often determined by the quantity of drugs involved. Higher quantities come with mandatory minimum sentences and higher maximum sentences. For instance, a small amount of drugs might not carry a mandatory minimum, and the maximum sentence could be 10 years. However, if the quantity is higher, you could face a mandatory minimum of five or ten years, with a maximum of up to 40 years or even life in prison.
The second way drug quantity affects cases is through the federal sentencing guidelines. Judges must consider these guidelines, and the higher the quantity, the higher the recommended sentence the guidelines suggest. So, drug quantity influences both the charge and the potential sentence.
Rene Perras: That sounds like a complex process. How does your experience as a former federal prosecutor help you navigate these challenges when defending your clients?
John Helms: Well, my experience gives me insight into how prosecutors think. I understand what they’re looking for in a plea agreement, how they build their case for trial, and which strategies work or don’t work in federal drug cases. Having been a prosecutor, I also know what sentencing options might appeal to a judge, so I can better anticipate the government’s moves.
Rene Perras: Speaking of the broader topic, the DEA’s Dallas field division recently announced significant seizures of methamphetamines and fentanyl. Does this reflect an increase in drug activity within the Dallas-Fort Worth community?
John Helms: I haven’t noticed a significant increase or decrease in law enforcement activity recently. However, fentanyl cases have surged over the past few years due to the rising amount of fentanyl coming into the area, not necessarily because of more law enforcement activity. Law enforcement is steady, well-funded, and well-organized, constantly working to prevent illegal drugs from being distributed.
Rene Perras: With technology evolving, has law enforcement started using modern tools like drones for surveillance?
John Helms: Absolutely. I’ve seen an increase in drone surveillance. In the past, aerial surveillance involved planes or helicopters, which were noticeable. Now, drones are being used to monitor drug transactions and follow vehicles undetected, providing powerful evidence for law enforcement.
Rene Perras: That’s fascinating! It reminds me of those highway signs warning drivers about planes checking for speeding. It seems drones have now taken over!
John Helms: Yes, and along the Mexico border, you’ll also see blimps tethered to the ground that Border Patrol uses for tracking activity in remote areas.
Rene Perras: Would it be fair to say that acquittals in federal criminal cases, particularly drug cases, are rare? Why is that?
John Helms: Yes, acquittals are less common in federal cases. This is because federal agents have more time to build solid cases. They often target larger, more organized drug operations, aiming to arrest multiple people, including those higher up in the supply chain. They’re patient and thorough, making these cases harder to defeat.
Rene Perras: What should a trial lawyer keep in mind when thinking about the possibility of an appeal?
John Helms: A trial lawyer must always think ahead and make sure to preserve legal issues for appeal. To appeal, you need to identify specific legal errors that occurred during the trial. If you don’t object to these errors at the right time, you can’t bring them up on appeal. It’s crucial to make timely objections and get a judge’s ruling on the record.
Rene Perras: Can you share an example of a recent federal drug case where you achieved a great outcome for a client?
John Helms: I recently had a case in the Eastern District of Texas involving methamphetamine trafficking. My client had been involved in sending drugs from Texas to Wisconsin. Although she was knowingly involved, we managed to show the court that her husband was the driving force behind the operation. Instead of facing a sentence of eight or nine years, she received probation, which is an extraordinary result in a federal drug case.
Rene Perras: That’s a remarkable outcome! John, thank you for sharing your insights today. Your expertise sheds light on critical issues surrounding federal drug cases. We look forward to having you back for part two, where we’ll dive deeper into navigating the complexities of federal drug cases.
John Helms: Thank you for having me.
Rene Perras: This has been Coffee with Q legal news. Stay tuned for our next episode!
