Articles Posted in Drugs

tennessean newspaper article

The Tennessean, 14 July 2000

Nearly eighteen years ago, I was part of a team hired to represent two men who were arrested after the discovery of 264 pounds of marijuana in the back of a trailer truck. At the preliminary hearing in Nashville General Sessions Court, we were able to prove to the judge that the men had their rights violated by police during the search and seizure.

tennessean newspaper articleThe Tennessean, 2 February 2001


A client out on parole was recently arrested with a loaded handgun and 52 grams of crack cocaine. Charged with possession of both drugs and the handgun, he was looking at anywhere from 22 to 38 years in prison. After hiring us, we got all the evidence thrown-out and the case was dismissed! We even got the charges expunged (erased) from his record! How did we do it? Through hard work in and out of the courtroom, we were able to prove the police violated his rights during the arrest.

This isn’t just a job for us. We take our client’s situations very seriously. At Himmelberg & Associates, we understand that people come to us during the worst days of their lives. For over 25 years, Attorney Don Himmelberg has helped guide Tennesseans through the difficult and confusing process of the criminal justice system. Criminal charges can affect your family, your job, and your future.

Don’t wait until it is too late. When you’re arrested, call us immediately. Let us help get your life back to normal. Call our office at (615) 353-0930 or call Don on his cell phone at (615) 308-5405.

Earlier this month a client of this law firm was arrested for possession of 42 pounds of marijuana that was found in the trunk of his car. Facing felony charges, substantial fines, and court costs and other fees, he didn’t know what to do. Needing an experienced defense lawyer in Nashville who has handled hundreds of drug cases, he gave us a call and set up a free consultation. We met with the client, devised an aggressive strategy to tackle his case, and then went on the offensive.

During our cross-examination of the arresting officer at the preliminary hearing, the presiding judge agreed with our defense and delivered a ruling in our favor that the stop was illegal.

Case Dismissed. No Felony Record! No Fine! No Court Cost! No Probation!

Download file

New Law on K2 and other Synthetic Drugs

Tennessee has started to crack down on K2 and other synthetic drugs that were commonly sold over the counter at tobacco and convenience stores state-wide. As of July 1, 2012 the amended law makes it illegal to possess, produce, or distribute any forms of these synthetic drugs. Tennessee legislature has made it a felony to produce any form of K2, synthetic marijuana, bath salts or other designer drugs for production, manufacture, distribution, or possession with intent to produce, or distributes the synthetic cannabinoids. Also, the bill states that stores selling these synthetic drugs can be padlocked as public nuisances. As enacted, it is Class E felony for manufacturing or selling an imitation controlled substance and the Class A misdemeanor for ingesting an imitation controlled substance and possessing an imitation controlled substance for the purpose of ingesting it. A Class E Felony is a serious offense and carries jail time along with up to a $5,000.00 fine. Class A Misdemeanor is punishable by 11 months 29 days in jail and up to a $2,500.00 fine. If you or anyone you know have been charged with possessing, producing, or distributing these synthetic drugs please contact Attorney Don Himmelberg.

Commonly known names of synthetic drugs: Nightmare Herbal Incense, Purple Diesel, Bang Bang, Cloud 9 Mad Hatter, Skywalker Herbal Potpourri XXXX-tra Intense Blend, Charlie Edition, Diablo, 7H Kush, 7H Hydro and K4 Lou.

Call and schedule your free consultation!
Continue reading

In 2005, the State of Tennessee passed a law requiring persons to pay an excise tax on illegal substances. The Tennessee unauthorized substance tax, or “drug tax” or “crack tax”, applies to controlled substances like marijuana and cocaine, and also illicit alcoholic beverages like moonshine. It allows someone to anonymously purchase stamps in person from the Department of Revenue based on the type and amount of the substance ($3.50 for a gram of marijuana, $50 for a gram of cocaine, etc.) with the understanding that doing so cannot be used against them in a criminal court. Possessing drugs is still illegal – the tax works completely outside the criminal justice system. A stamp cannot provide immunity from criminal prosecution, and a conviction of possession isn’t required for the Department of Revenue to assess the penalties.

Opponents to the tax say allowing authorities to levy illegal drugs allows officials to bully people not convicted of crimes into paying thousands of dollars. The opponents of the Tennessee Illegal Substance Tax, and there are many, include a wide variety of groups.

In July, 2006, Chancellor Richard Dinkins ruled that the tax was unconstitutional stating that the tax violates an individual’s right against self-incrimination and to due process.


Despite this fact, the Tennessee Department of Revenue continues to attempt to collect these taxes. One of the biggest targets for these tax collectors are Bonnaroo concert goers.
Continue reading

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court held in the case of Illinois v. Caballes that when a trained drug dog sniffs a persons automobile, there is no search. As a result, no constitutional violation occurs. This is the case even if the police have absolutely no reason to suspect you may be carrying illegal contraband whatsoever.


The majority reasoned that a dog’s sniffing is not really a “search” because it detects only contraband, and therefore does not compromise the privacy of someone who has nothing to hide. Justices David H. Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg both dissented strongly, warning that this decision could lead to “suspicionless and indiscriminate sweeps of cars in parking garages and pedestrians on sidewalks.”

The decision was not shocking, it was merely an extension of an earlier case decided by the Supreme Court in 1982 which held that the use of drug sniffing dogs to search luggage in an airport was in fact not a search either. (United States v. Place).
Continue reading