Law and Order: Man charged after report of overdose
Joseph M. Marranco, 43, of Walnut Street, Batavia, is charged with criminal possession of a hypodermic instrument, unlawful possession of marijuana and possession of controlled substances outside original container. Marranco was arrested following the report of an overdose at 10:40 p.m. Monday at an apartment on East Main Street. Marranco was allegedly found in possession of a hypodermic needle, an assortment of controlled prescription medications outside their original container and marijuana.
Travis M. Blue, 30, of Ellicott Street, Batavia, is charged with harassment, 2nd. Blue allegedly made a threat of physical contact during an incident reported at 9:35 p.m., Monday, at a location on Ellicott Street.
Randy Kevin Wilmet, 37, of Lake Street, Le Roy, is charged with harassment, 2nd. Wilmet allegedly struck another person in the face with his forearm during an incident reported at 6:30 p.m., Saturday, at a location on South Main Street, Batavia.
Jeffrey C. Pero, 31, of Brooklyn Avenue, Batavia, turned himself in on a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket. Pero posted $100 cash bail and was released.
Kritin S. Payne, 31, of South Main Street, Batavia, turned herself in on on a warrant for an unpaid parking ticket. Payne paid $45 of a $100 bail and was released.
Michael David Senay Jr., 20, of Valley View Drive, Batavia, is charged with unlawful possession of alcohol by a person under age 21. Senay was allegedly in possession of alcohol during a traffic stop at 1:14 a.m. on Clinton Street, Batavia, by Deputy Joseph Corona.
Stephen Bakos, 55, of Alexander, is charged with DWI following a traffic stop on Silver Lake Road, Perry. Bakos was stopped for an alleged equipment violation. According to New York State Police, Bakos operated the vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. Bakos reportedly failed a roadside field sobriety test and was taken into custody. He is accused of refusing to provide a breath sample for analysis.Bakos was jailed on $1,000 bail.
I thought there was a law on the books to prevent drug charges when there is an overdose situation?
The Good Samaritan Law, passed in 2011.
It doesn't say he was the one who OD. (I don't know either way, just noting that it doesn't say that).
Gotcha. I thought the Good Samaritan Law was to encourage someone with an OD'ing individual to call the appropriate authorities without fear of being arrested himself though...
Jason is correct Howard I did some research and this was the simplest explanation of the law Jason refers to...
On September 18, 2011, New York’s 911 Good Samaritan law went into effect. The law encourages people to call 911 immediately during an overdose situation by offering a limited shield from charge and prosecution of drug and alcohol possession for a victim or witness who seeks medical help during a drug or alcohol overdose.
So it is intended to shield the bystanders that call for the ODing person.
Kyle: First, I will preface this with the thought that what you wrote may well be true.
As for the 2nd paragraph of your comment, you left no clue as to where you got it. It COULD HAVE been written by a lawyer, a person with a medical background, or someone connected with law enforcement. It also COULD HAVE been written by a 9th grader as part of an English assignment. With no attribution, we just don't know.
In reading it, I noticed the part that read, "... by offering a limited shield from charge and prosecution of drug and ...".
The words "limited shield" jumped out. That could mean anything from "We won't charge you with anything criminal" to "We'll take your involvement into consideration". Again, we just don't know.
You can find more about this on the NY gov't website at http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=%20&bn=S04454&term=2011&Sum...
Of course, one has to be up on their understanding with the gobbledegook of legalese language, to make heads/tails of what's being said. Which explains (part) of the reason attorneys make so much money.
Often times there are things going on that are not apparent for the rather stripped down police press release.
I've written to the chief to see if we can get further explanation.
Upon looking at this story though Ed let me propose another possibility. It could be that this "gentleman" perhaps did not call 911 and was very unco-operative. It could be he was the homeowner and it was his drugs that the person supposedly OD'ed on.
So it very well could be that a third party both called 911 to report the OD and is enjoying immunity while this other guy takes a fall.
True, Kyle. We only know what Howard reported. There are an untold number of scenarios that would fit - ie. When the police got to the destination, some guy (not even related to the 'case') hopped on the hood of their cruiser and started dancing the Macarena.
We're limited by the info provided.
I think it was the Electric slide though....not the Macarena
If they were doing either of those dances, the arrest was justified.
I heard back from Chief Heubusch.
The overdose victim allegedly refused medical treatment. The Good Samaritan Law requires a "good faith" request for health care.
The caller in this case was protected by the law. The victim, in allegedly refusing health care, was not.
Thanks for the clarification, Howard.