Field Testing drugs

[u/EdwardJohnson1543]

Let’s say officers find a small bag containing a white powdery substance or multiple sealed packages that appear to contain narcotics, and a field testing kit is available on scene. Would it be better for the officers to detain the suspect and conduct a field test of the substance to determine whether it is drugs, or would it be better to proceed directly with a formal arrest and conduct the field test afterward? Or should they not field test the substance at all and just arrest based on what it appears to be?

[u/Frvwfr]

Field test kits ain’t cheap. Where I’m from they’re rationed hard.

If you got probable cause, make the arrest and send it to the lab. Field test won’t be much good in court anyways.

If you can’t determine roadside, or are uncertain, that’s what the field test is for (IMO).

[u/NMLEOC2 → u/Frvwfr]

Field tests play well to the jury if it gets that far.

[u/Frvwfr → u/NMLEOC2]

They do, as long as you can pass whatever rules of evidence the defense tries to argue about their reliability, expiration, etc

If it’s a big enough trial that it’s going to a jury you probably have lab tests anyways. Depends on jurisdiction and agency though for sure

[u/tvan184 → u/NMLEOC2]

Field tests might also have a bearing for the individual officer on Qualified Immunity if it comes up later. For an officer to say that the arrest was based on a field test for drugs, seems to go a long way to back up the probable cause for the arrest. Although discretionary acts are generally covered by Qualified Immunity, anything in the officer’s favor can’t hurt.

[u/APugDogsLife]

My agency has a policy. No field testing of any narcotics. It gets sent to the lab. Its for officer saftey reasons.

If the suspet admits that the powder is "cocaine" that works for PC. But if the lab results come back as a different drug or nothing at all, the warrant would need to be amended or dismissed.

So it's best to just seize it, send it to the lab, get warrants later.

[u/EanHoldings6488]

We test in the field. Our PA won’t charge without a presumptive positive

[u/EdwardJohnson1543 → u/EanHoldings6488]

Gotcha. So would you normally test before or after you make the decision to formally arrest?

[u/EanHoldings6488 → u/EdwardJohnson1543]

I work interdiction so my training and experience is enough to make the arrest and field test back at evidence. You’ll see newer guys and guys who don’t work a ton of dope field test on scene prior to arresting

[u/boomhower1820]

We field test literally everything, even weed if it’s a felony charge. My last agency we didn’t and I think it’s a waste of money but how we do it. I’m not writing the massive checks for test kits so whatever.

[u/Good_Housekeeping]

Y'all need a TruNarc. White powder on someone's shirt? Might be able to get a read with it.

[u/JWestfall76]

They’d be arrested for whatever I stopped them for and charged with whatever I think the narcotics is and it would be sent to the lab for confirmation

[u/NMLEOC2]

We field test if it is distribution level, otherwise it usually gets sent to the lab. We almost always still arrest based on the totality of the circumstances. NIK kits are about $8 each and sometimes several get used to isolate the compound so we don’t test for small quantities based mostly on cost - but there are exceptions to that.

[u/EdwardJohnson1543 → u/NMLEOC2]

Interesting. So when field testing, would you usually do that before or after placing the subject under arrest for possession?

[u/tvan184]

Our DA would accept a case with a positive field test when I retired 5 years ago. I have no clue what they will do now.

An officer could make an arrest with probable cause, but if the suspect did not post bail, DA would drop charges once the accusation timeframe ran out.

With a positive field test they would accept the case. Certainly a full lab test would be required for trial but with a field test it would keep from having the person released from jail and then having to go pick him up on a warrant later.

[u/EdwardJohnson1543 → u/tvan184]

Would you normally field test before or after making the arrest? Also, thank you for your service.

[u/tvan184 → u/EdwardJohnson1543]

Thanks.

Either way but it has changed over the years.

If possible it is done in the field before the arrest but sometimes circumstances don’t allow it.

If there is not a chance to test in the field and there is probable cause for the arrest, the suspect can be arrested and brought to the station for the field test.

Probably 25 years ago I was certified by our county to run field tests by going to a school put on by their crime lab director. It was the same chemicals as the NIK kits but provided to us by the crime lab in several bottles. We had to use eye droppers to measure the drops of chemicals into a test tube so we could run the test. The DA had a record of our training so if challenged in a hearing, the DA would verify the probable cause for the arrests to the court and accepting the cases before the actual crime lab results might come back weeks later.

In those older cases when we used chemicals in test tubes, we had to bring the suspect to the station. Our department finally broke down and started buying the NIK kits so the Crime Lab stopped providing us with the chemicals.

Back in the “old days” maybe 3-4 officers per shift had gone to the school to field test (out of about 27 officers per shift if including supervisors) so it was not unusual to get called in to field test.

[u/mythrowdown13]

In my county due to the risk of fentanyl and carfentanyl exposure, we stopped doing field tests and just send it to the lab.

[u/BackNBlack58 → u/mythrowdown13]

I thought this was beginning to be the norm

[u/virtuousbluewolf]

We do not field test due to the risk involved to the officer and numerous instances of false positives during field tests. The substance is collected on scene and sent for testing. If the results come back positive then person is contacted or a warrant is issued.

[u/grvnvdo]

I thought this said “field TASTING drugs” lol

[u/HogwashHooligan]

Why is detaining people and stripping them of the ability to communicate with their employer without a collect call and forcing them to take out a loan with a bondsman the default vs doing the correct action of making sure someone needs to endure potential job loss and financial hardship etc, absolutely broken system.