Juana Swain is currently fighting for her life in a hospital in Tucson, Arizona. She was declared brain dead on October 5, 2016, days after she was charged with possession of a controlled substance.

As a result of Swain’s charges, she was ordered temporarily held in Maricopa County Jail but released the next day. A new charge of possession of marijuana was filed on October 22, 2016.

“As a member of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, Ms. Kincaid used her position in the office to solicit and solicit marijuana from people both inside the jail and outside,” said Kincaid’s attorney, Mark Rosen. “The Sheriff’s Office has been aware of this activity for many, many months, and for that reason, has no tolerance for the Sheriff’s Office’s actions.”

Earlier this year Maricopa County sent a cease and desist order to Kincaid and her attorney that demanded they stop taking marijuana and other similar items. On October 12, 2016 Kincaid filed a motion to dismiss this objection. The motion argued that jailhouse informants were not immune from prosecution under federal law, that her attorneys did not have the authority to do so, and that jailhouse informants could be prosecuted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for engaging in federal crimes if they provided information to federal agents.

The court upheld the motion, finding that jailhouse informants are immune from prosecution as long as their “material support” is for a specific, specific crime.

“Ms. Kincaid has had a substantial record of drug-related offenses since she and our clients began representing her,” Rosen said. “There is no question, she admitted to engaging in this conduct, but there is also no question that she has no immunity from prosecution under federal law. While the law may at times require that defendants testify, the law is clear that defendant is not permitted to testify in a federal prosecution of this type.”

“This case is not the start of a trend or a new trend in this area; we filed one on this matter in 1996 and it was dismissed, there were no appeals, it was dismissed from the bench,” Rosen pointed out. “This particular case is an example of why we believe it is very important that the federal government and the courts protect law-abiding citizens from unreasonable and unwarranted prosecutions. The case is certainly not a precedent,” added Rosen, who added that there is no mention to K