About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



62 St. Louis U. L.J. 739 (2017-2018)
The Voluntary Act Requirement in Prison Contraband Cases

handle is hein.journals/stlulj62 and id is 789 raw text is: 








         THE   VOLUNTARY ACT REQUIREMENT IN PRISON
                         CONTRABAND CASES


                               INTRODUCTION
    When  has one committed  the crime of introducing prison contraband? This
is an important question when one is visiting a prison, voluntarily or otherwise,
and a question which can be surprisingly difficult to answer. Most state statutes
punishing  the introduction of prison contraband look much  like California's
statute:
    Except when otherwise authorized by law ... any person, who knowingly brings
    or sends into, or knowingly assists in bringing into, or sending into, any state
    prison ... or within the grounds belonging to the institution, any controlled
    substance, . . . any device, contrivance, instrument, or paraphernalia intended to
    be used for unlawfully injecting or consuming a controlled substance, is guilty
    of a felony ... .
These statutes are straightforward, containing a mens rea, usually knowingly,2
an actus reus, usually introducing, possessing, conveying, etc.,3 and then a list
of prohibited objects. Moreover, the prototypical prison-contraband cases, such
as baking a gun into a cake and mailing it to prison,4 or mailing a friend drugs
in a package designated as legal mail,5 are equally straightforward violations of
introducing-contraband  statutes. However, in a subset  of prison-contraband
cases, where the defendant is arrested with the contraband already on his or her
person, loaded into the back of a police car, and taken to the county jail, the
violation is not so clear. These cases are complicated by the defendants' simple
defense that they did not want to bring their contraband to jail; rather, their arrest
forced them to bring it into the facility.
    Usually, these cases play out like the case of People v. Gastello, where the
defendant was  arrested for being under the influence of a controlled substance



    1. CAL. PENAL CODE § 4573(a) (2011).
    2. ARiz. REV. STAT. ANN. § 13-2505(A)(1) (2016); PENAL § 4573(a); COLO. REV. STAT.
ANN. § 18-8-203(1)(a) (2012); OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 2921.36(A) (2013).
    3. ARIz. REV. STAT. § 13-2505(A)(2) (2016); COLO. REV. STAT. ANN. § 18-8-203(1)(a)
(2012); MO. REV. STAT. § 221.111 (2017); OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 2921.36(A) (2013).
    4. Jesse Rhodes, The File Inside the Cake: True Tales ofPrison Escapes, SMrrHsONLAN.cOM
(June 14, 2011), http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/the-file-inside-the-cake-true-tales-
of-prison-escapes-15653967/ [https://perma.cc/WTR3-BLH2].
    5. Wilson v. Haney, 430 S.W.3d 254, 256 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014).


739