The anxiety and uncertainty that can overwhelm you when facing a criminal charge in Fargo are immense, and an accusation of fraudulent practice in urine testing is no exception. This charge can instantly jeopardize your employment, professional standing, and even your freedom, turning your life upside down in an instant. The fear of a conviction, the potential for jail time, and the lasting impact on your reputation can feel suffocating. You might be questioning how this situation escalated to a criminal matter and what path lies ahead to protect your future from such serious allegations.
When confronted with a charge of fraudulent practice in urine testing, it is crucial to recognize that you are not in this battle alone. This is not just you against the formidable resources of the prosecution; it is you and me, standing united against the state. My role is to serve as your unwavering protector and relentless fighter, meticulously dissecting every aspect of the prosecution’s case and ensuring your rights are fiercely defended at every turn. Together, we will construct a robust defense strategy designed to challenge the accusations, expose any weaknesses in the evidence, and fight tirelessly to secure the most favorable outcome for your case.
The Stakes Are High: Understanding North Dakota’s Fraudulent Practice in Urine Testing Laws & Penalties
Fraudulent practice in urine testing involves intentionally manipulating a drug test or possessing materials for that purpose. In North Dakota, this crime, though seemingly minor to some, is taken seriously due to its implications for public safety, justice, and fair employment practices. A conviction can lead to significant criminal penalties, including jail time and substantial fines, underscoring the critical importance of a skilled legal defense.
What the Statute Says
The offense of Fraudulent Practice in Urine Testing in North Dakota is governed by North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. This statute defines the prohibited actions related to defrauding a urine test and the possession or distribution of related devices or substances.1
12.1-11-07. Fraudulent practice in urine testing.
A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if that person willfully defrauds a urine test and the test is designed to detect the presence of a chemical substance or a controlled substance. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if that person knowingly possesses, distributes, or assists in the use of a device, chemical, or real or artificial urine advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test.
As a Class A Misdemeanor
In North Dakota, a person found guilty of fraudulent practice in urine testing, whether by willfully defrauding a test or by knowingly possessing, distributing, or assisting in the use of devices/substances to alter a test, is guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor.2 This is a serious criminal offense carrying significant penalties. A Class A Misdemeanor conviction can result in a maximum of three hundred sixty-four (364) days in jail.3 Additionally, the court has the authority to impose a fine of up to three thousand dollars ($3,000). Beyond these direct legal consequences, a conviction will result in a permanent criminal record, which can severely impact future employment opportunities, particularly in positions requiring drug screenings, and can damage your personal and professional reputation.
What Does a Fraudulent Practice in Urine Testing Charge Look Like in Fargo?
A charge of fraudulent practice in urine testing often evokes images of individuals attempting to evade drug detection for illegal substances, but the scope of this crime in Fargo is broader and can arise in various, sometimes unexpected, real-world scenarios within our community. It’s not just about failing a drug test; it’s about the deliberate and willful intent to deceive the testing process, whether by altering one’s own sample or by facilitating such alteration for others. This offense applies equally to those who directly manipulate a test and those who knowingly provide the means for others to do so.
Understanding these practical examples helps illustrate how easily someone can find themselves facing a criminal charge under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. The law targets any intentional action aimed at subverting the integrity of a urine test designed to detect chemical or controlled substances, regardless of the underlying reason for the test (e.g., employment, probation, or legal proceedings).
Using a Dilution Method for a Drug Test
Consider an individual in Fargo who is required to undergo a urine test as a condition of their employment or probation. Knowing they might test positive for a chemical substance, they consume an excessive amount of water or other liquids before the test, attempting to dilute their urine sample to the point where any detectable substances fall below cutoff levels. This deliberate act, performed with the specific intent to mask the presence of a chemical substance, directly fits the definition of “willfully defrauds a urine test” under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. Even if no specific device is used, the intentional manipulation of the body to alter the test outcome constitutes fraudulent practice, leading to a Class A Misdemeanor charge.
Possessing a “Whizzinator” for a Pre-Employment Screening
Imagine someone applying for a job in Fargo that requires a pre-employment drug screening. This individual, anticipating a positive drug test, purchases a “Whizzinator” or a similar device—which typically involves synthetic urine and a prosthetic to simulate urination—with the express intent of using it to submit a “clean” sample. While they might not have used the device yet, the act of “knowingly possesses… a device… or real or artificial urine advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test” is explicitly prohibited by North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. Even mere possession with the intent to defraud is a Class A Misdemeanor, highlighting the law’s proactive stance against such deceptive practices.
Selling Urine Additives Online
Picture an individual operating out of Fargo who advertises and sells chemical additives online, marketing them as products specifically designed to “cleanse” urine samples and help pass drug tests. They knowingly distribute these chemicals with the express understanding that buyers intend to use them to alter the outcome of urine tests for chemical or controlled substances. Regardless of whether they personally use these substances or defraud a test, their active role in “distributes… a chemical… advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test” makes them guilty of a Class A Misdemeanor under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. This scenario emphasizes that facilitating fraudulent practices is as criminal as performing them.
Assisting a Friend with a Substituted Sample
Consider a situation where an individual in Fargo, aware that a friend needs to pass a mandatory drug test, agrees to provide a clean urine sample or otherwise helps them by hiding synthetic urine on their person. The individual then “assists in the use of a device, chemical, or real or artificial urine intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test” by physically helping their friend prepare or carry the substitute sample into the testing facility. This direct involvement in aiding and abetting the fraudulent practice, even if they aren’t the one being tested, constitutes a Class A Misdemeanor under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07. The act of knowingly providing assistance to defraud a test is sufficient for a criminal charge.
Building Your Defense: How I Fight Fraudulent Practice in Urine Testing Charges in Fargo
A charge of fraudulent practice in urine testing can be devastating, impacting your employment, personal reputation, and even your freedom. The prosecution will undoubtedly attempt to prove your willful intent to defraud or your knowing possession/distribution of illicit testing materials. Without a strategic and aggressive defense, you risk a conviction that can have long-lasting, negative consequences on your life. My approach is to meticulously scrutinize every detail of the accusation, challenging the evidence and the prosecution’s narrative to protect your rights and your future.
My commitment in defending against fraudulent practice in urine testing charges in Fargo is to challenge the prosecution’s story at every single turn. We will not passively accept their assertions regarding your intent or knowledge. Instead, we will thoroughly investigate the circumstances surrounding the alleged offense, examine the integrity of the urine test itself, and uncover any procedural missteps or constitutional violations by law enforcement. This proactive and aggressive approach is fundamental to dismantling the state’s case brick by brick, ensuring that every argument in your favor is heard and your defense is as robust as possible.
Challenging the Element of “Willfulness” or “Knowledge”
A key component of a fraudulent urine testing charge is the mental state of the accused. The statute explicitly uses terms like “willfully defrauds” or “knowingly possesses, distributes, or assists.” Disproving this intent can be a powerful defense.
- Lack of Willful Intent to Defraud: The prosecution must prove that you willfully defrauded the urine test. If your actions, though perhaps leading to an altered result, were not done with the specific intent to deceive the test, then the “willfully” element is not met. For example, if dilution occurred due to excessive legitimate hydration without the specific purpose of altering test results, or if an unexpected medication caused a false positive you tried to correct through legitimate means. We will gather evidence to show that any alteration was not a deliberate act of fraud but rather an unintended consequence or a good-faith effort to comply.
- Absence of Knowledge Regarding Device/Chemical’s Purpose: If you are accused of knowingly possessing, distributing, or assisting in the use of a device or chemical intended to alter a urine test, a defense can be built on proving a lack of knowledge regarding its intended purpose. For instance, you might have possessed an item without being aware of its specific use in defrauding drug tests, or you might have been asked to hold something for someone without understanding its illicit nature. We will investigate the circumstances of possession or distribution to show that you lacked the requisite “knowledge” of the item’s unlawful intent, thereby negating a core element of the charge.
Scrutinizing the Testing Process and Evidence Integrity
The reliability of the urine test itself, and the procedures used during collection and analysis, can be critical areas for defense. Any flaw in this process can undermine the prosecution’s evidence.
- Improper Collection or Chain of Custody: Urine tests follow strict protocols for collection, sealing, and transport to maintain the integrity of the sample. Any deviation from these protocols, such as improper temperature monitoring, a break in the chain of custody, or an unsealed sample, can lead to contamination or questions about the sample’s authenticity.4 We will meticulously review the entire collection and handling process, seeking out any procedural errors that could render the test results inadmissible or unreliable, thereby weakening the prosecution’s ability to prove tampering.
- Faulty Testing Equipment or Procedures: Laboratories performing urine tests must adhere to specific calibration, maintenance, and testing procedures. If the equipment used for analysis was faulty, uncalibrated, or if the lab’s standard operating procedures were not followed, the accuracy of the test results can be called into question. We would challenge the methodology and equipment used by the testing facility, potentially bringing in expert witnesses to testify about deficiencies in the lab’s practices that could lead to inaccurate or unreliable results, casting doubt on the alleged fraudulent practice.
Challenging Law Enforcement Conduct
The methods used by law enforcement during the investigation can often provide avenues for defense, especially if constitutional rights were violated.
- Illegal Search and Seizure: If the device, chemical, or artificial urine was discovered through an unlawful search of your person, vehicle, or property without a warrant, probable cause, or your valid consent, then that evidence may be inadmissible in court. My defense will meticulously examine the circumstances surrounding any searches and seizures, arguing for the suppression of any evidence obtained in violation of your Fourth Amendment rights, which could significantly weaken or even dismantle the prosecution’s case.
- Coerced Statements or Improper Interrogation: Your Fifth Amendment right protects you from self-incrimination.5 If law enforcement used coercive tactics, threats, promises, or failed to properly inform you of your Miranda rights (the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney) before questioning, any statements you made could be deemed inadmissible. I will thoroughly review the interrogation process, including any video or audio recordings, to identify any violations of your constitutional rights, and if found, move to have your statements excluded from evidence.
Arguing Lack of Advertisement or Intention
For charges related to possessing or distributing devices/chemicals, the prosecution must often prove that the item was “advertised or intended” to alter test outcomes.
- Product Not Advertised for Illicit Use: If the device or chemical in question was not explicitly advertised or marketed for the purpose of defrauding urine tests, and you were unaware of any such illicit advertising, it can undermine a key element of the charge. For example, if you possessed a common household chemical that could be used for tampering but was not marketed for that purpose, and you had no knowledge of its potential misuse. My defense would focus on demonstrating that the item lacked the specific advertising or labeling required by the statute to prove its illicit intent.
- Bona Fide Purpose for Possession: There may be legitimate, innocent reasons for possessing certain chemicals or devices that could potentially be used to alter a urine test. For example, if you possessed synthetic urine for a scientific experiment, for novelty purposes, or as a prop, rather than with the intent to defraud a drug test. We would present evidence of a legitimate, non-criminal purpose for your possession, directly challenging the prosecution’s claim that the item was “intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test,” thereby negating the criminal intent required for conviction.
Your Questions About North Dakota Fraudulent Practice in Urine Testing Charges Answered
What exactly does “willfully defrauds a urine test” mean?
“Willfully defrauds a urine test” means that the person intentionally and deliberately acts to deceive the urine test, with the specific purpose of altering its outcome to conceal the presence of a chemical or controlled substance. This goes beyond mere negligence or an accidental action. It implies a conscious decision and a clear intent to manipulate the testing process to avoid a positive result or to produce a false negative. Examples include diluting a sample with water, substituting a “clean” sample, or adding adulterants to the urine.
What substances are covered by “chemical substance or a controlled substance”?
The statute broadly refers to “a chemical substance or a controlled substance.” A “controlled substance” typically refers to drugs regulated by state and federal laws, such as marijuana, cocaine, opioids, methamphetamine, and various prescription medications.6 A “chemical substance” is a broader term that could potentially include anything designed to be detected in a urine test, even if not classified as a controlled substance, or substances used as adulterants to interfere with the test’s detection capabilities. The intent is to cover any substance a test is designed to find or any substance used to prevent such detection.
Can I be charged if I possessed a device but didn’t use it?
Yes, under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07, you can be charged with a Class A Misdemeanor simply for “knowingly possess[ing]… a device, chemical, or real or artificial urine advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test.” The law specifically targets the possession with the requisite knowledge and intent, meaning actual use of the item is not a necessary element for a conviction. The mere act of having the item, knowing its illicit purpose, is sufficient for a criminal charge.
What if I bought something advertised for detox, not fraud?
This is a nuanced area. If a product is advertised generally for “detox” and not explicitly or implicitly for the purpose of defrauding a urine test, and you genuinely believed it was for a legitimate detox, then you may have a defense regarding the “knowingly” element. However, if the product’s marketing heavily implies or suggests its use to pass drug tests, or if you had actual knowledge of its use for fraudulent purposes, even if it has a superficial “detox” label, you could still be charged. The key is your intent and knowledge regarding the product’s specific purpose for altering test outcomes.
What are the penalties for a Class A Misdemeanor conviction?
A conviction for fraudulent practice in urine testing as a Class A Misdemeanor in North Dakota carries significant penalties. You could face up to three hundred sixty-four (364) days in jail, a fine of up to three thousand dollars ($3,000), or both. Beyond these direct legal consequences, a conviction will result in a permanent criminal record, which can have long-lasting negative impacts on your employment prospects, particularly in jobs requiring drug screenings, and can damage your overall reputation.
How will this charge affect my current or future employment?
A charge or conviction for fraudulent practice in urine testing can severely impact your current and future employment. Many employers, especially those in safety-sensitive industries, healthcare, or government, require drug screenings and conduct background checks.7 An accusation, and certainly a conviction, for defrauding a test indicates a lack of integrity and can lead to immediate termination, denial of employment, or loss of professional licenses. It sends a clear signal of dishonesty, which can significantly limit your career opportunities across various sectors.
Is there a difference between “real” and “artificial” urine in the statute?
No, the statute treats “real or artificial urine” equally when it comes to possession, distribution, or assistance in use, as long as it is “advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test.” Whether you possess synthetic urine purchased online or real urine from another person, the criminal offense is the same if it’s knowingly possessed, distributed, or used with the intent to fraudulently alter a drug test result. The law is designed to cover all means by which a false sample might be introduced.
What if I was coerced or pressured into defrauding a test?
If you were coerced or pressured into committing fraudulent practice in urine testing, such as under duress or threats of serious harm, it could be a potential defense. The defense of duress argues that you committed the crime because you were under an immediate threat of serious bodily injury or death, and you had no reasonable escape other than to commit the act.8 This would negate the “willfully” or “knowingly” elements of the crime, as your actions were not truly voluntary. However, this is a difficult defense to prove and requires strong corroborating evidence.
What kind of devices are prohibited under this law?
The law broadly prohibits any “device… advertised or intended to be used to alter the outcome of a urine test.” This can include a wide range of items, such as synthetic urine kits (like the “Whizzinator”), bladder bags, prosthetic devices designed to deliver a substitute sample, or any specialized containers or delivery systems marketed for subverting drug tests. The key is their advertisement or intended use for fraudulent purposes, rather than their specific design. Even seemingly innocent items could be considered if they are clearly intended for illicit use.
Will I lose my driver’s license if convicted of this crime?
While a conviction for fraudulent practice in urine testing is a criminal offense, it does not typically result in the direct suspension or revocation of your driver’s license in North Dakota, unlike certain traffic-related offenses or drug convictions (e.g., DUI). However, if the urine test was related to a legal proceeding, such as probation for a drug offense, and defrauding the test constitutes a violation of your probation, then that violation could lead to other penalties, including driver’s license suspension, as part of your probation terms.
Can law enforcement search me if they suspect me of this crime before a test?
Law enforcement generally needs probable cause to conduct a search of your person. If officers have a reasonable belief, based on specific facts and circumstances, that you are about to commit or have committed fraudulent practice in urine testing (e.g., they observe you with a suspicious device or overhear a conversation about it), they might have grounds for a search. However, any search must adhere to constitutional protections. If evidence is obtained through an illegal search, your attorney can move to have it suppressed, which could significantly impact the prosecution’s case against you.
What if the urine test was for something other than drugs (e.g., medical purposes)?
North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-11-07 specifically states that the test must be “designed to detect the presence of a chemical substance or a controlled substance.” If a urine test is purely for a medical diagnosis that has no connection to detecting chemical or controlled substances (e.g., a test for diabetes or kidney function), then defrauding such a test would likely not fall under this specific criminal statute. The law’s intent is clearly focused on drug testing in particular contexts, such as employment, legal, or probation-related screenings.
What is the difference between “distributes” and “assists in the use”?
“Distributes” means to hand out, sell, or deliver a device, chemical, or artificial urine intended for fraudulent testing. This implies a transfer of the item to another person. “Assists in the use” is broader and refers to actively helping or aiding someone else in using such an item to alter a urine test. This could involve physically helping them hide a device, providing instructions on how to use an adulterant, or even providing a “clean” sample. Both actions are equally criminal under the statute, reflecting the law’s aim to penalize both the suppliers and facilitators of fraudulent testing.
How quickly should I contact an attorney if I’m accused of this crime?
You should contact an experienced criminal defense attorney in Fargo immediately if you are accused of or are under investigation for fraudulent practice in urine testing. The sooner you seek legal counsel, the better. Early intervention allows your attorney to advise you on your rights, prevent you from inadvertently making self-incriminating statements, begin independent investigations, and strategize the strongest possible defense.9 Waiting can lead to missed opportunities and potentially weaken your position, as evidence can be lost or witnesses’ memories fade over time.
Can I get this charge expunged from my record in North Dakota?
Yes, in North Dakota, it is generally possible to petition for the expungement (sealing) of a Class A Misdemeanor conviction, including for fraudulent practice in urine testing, after a certain period has passed since the completion of your sentence and any probation. Expungement can help remove the conviction from public background checks, though it may still be accessible to law enforcement. The process is not automatic and requires a successful petition to the court, demonstrating that you meet the specific eligibility requirements under North Dakota law. An attorney can guide you through this complex process and assess your eligibility.
Your Future Is Worth Fighting For
A charge of fraudulent practice in urine testing can cast a long and damaging shadow over your livelihood and career. Many professions, especially those requiring security clearances, professional licenses, or positions of trust, conduct stringent background checks and drug screenings.10 A criminal conviction for this offense signals dishonesty and a willingness to circumvent rules, which can directly lead to job loss, denial of employment, or the revocation of professional certifications. Your ability to earn a living and progress in your chosen field is fundamentally at stake, underscoring the severe collateral consequences beyond immediate legal penalties.
Beyond the professional impact, facing such a charge can threaten your fundamental constitutional rights. The legal process is complex, and without aggressive representation, you risk inadvertently waiving critical protections, such as your right to remain silent or your right to a fair and impartial investigation. The prosecution will mobilize its resources to build a case against you, and navigating interrogations, evidence discovery, and courtroom procedures without an experienced advocate can leave your liberties vulnerable and your future precarious.
I know the Fargo courts and the prosecution intimately. My extensive experience within the local legal system means I understand their tactics, their preferred strategies, and the specific nuances of how these cases are handled in our community. This invaluable insight allows me to anticipate their moves, challenge their evidence effectively, and build a defense that is specifically tailored to the unique environment of Fargo’s courts. This local expertise is not merely a benefit; it is a crucial component of delivering a robust and effective defense on your behalf.
A single allegation of fraudulent practice should not be allowed to define your entire life or derail your future. Your reputation, your career, and your freedom are too valuable to be left to chance. I am committed to fighting tirelessly for my clients, meticulously scrutinizing every detail of the accusation, challenging every assumption, and ensuring that your side of the story is presented with clarity and conviction. Let me be the unwavering advocate who stands firmly by your side, fiercely protecting your rights and helping you secure the future you deserve, free from the burden of an unjust conviction.