ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

Last November, Missouri voters changed that constitution by passing Amendment 3, which legalized recreational marijuana in the state. But it also expunged some nonviolent marijuana offenses to clean the records of Missourians convicted for partaking in, or selling, a substance that voters had decided was now legal.

Usry grew up in New Melle, in St. Charles County. When he was 22, he sold a quarter-ounce of marijuana — “dirt weed,� he calls it — to an undercover police officer for $40.

He was convicted and served his time. Not much longer, he picked up another drug charge: possession of three grams of cocaine. He went to prison for three years.

While on parole in 2011, he was charged and convicted of possessing a “two liter ‘shake-n-bake’ meth lab� found on the side of the road. This time, he was sentenced to 20 years in prison without the possibility of parole. That’s because he was considered a “prior and persistent drug offender.�

Thanks to voters, that’s no longer true.

Earlier this year, Usry’s pot conviction disappeared.

Here’s what voters put into the state constitution about such old convictions: “The person whose record is expunged shall be treated in all respects as if he or she had never been arrested, convicted, or sentenced for the offense, and the conviction and sentence shall be vacated as legally invalid. … The effect of such expungement shall be to restore such a person to the status the person occupied prior to such arrest, plea, or conviction and as if such event had never taken place.�

Usry is asking a St. Charles County judge to decide if the words that voters put in the constitution mean what they say. This month, his attorney, Brian Cooke, filed a motion asking the judge to resentence Usry, based on the fact that Usry was no longer considered a “prior and persistent� offender.

Cooke isn’t asking that the 20-year sentence change. He’s asking that Usry be eligible for parole, as he would have been if the pot conviction wasn’t used to enhance his later offense. Cooke is representing Usry pro-bono. He credits his client for coming up with the argument for a resentencing.

The case presents a prickly legal question. Historically, Missouri courts don’t like to look backward. If they did, Usry might already be a free man. That’s because in 2014, the Missouri Legislature got rid of the ability for judges to send non-violent drug offenders away without the possibility of parole. The legislature, to its credit, realized that the over-criminalization of drug addiction doesn’t serve society well. The courts are sometimes slower to adapt.

In 2020, the Missouri Supreme Court almost sent Dimetrious Woods back to prison — after he had been paroled and free for two years. The court said the change to the drug law couldn’t be applied retroactively. Woods would have been locked up again if not for a commutation of his sentence by Gov. Mike Parson.

Now, Usry is asking to be eligible for parole because voters changed the state constitution so that in at least one type of case — a nonviolent marijuana conviction — courts can look backward and change the records of Missourians.

Usry spent all of his 30s in prison. He’s 43 now. He’s missed most of the life of his son, who is autistic and is now 20. His mother has died and his father is in poor health. Usry believes he’s served his time, and the Missouri Legislature does, as well.

Now it’s up to a judge to decide if voters’ actions truly carry the power of law.

“If I am to be treated as that conviction never existed, then I am no longer a prior and persistent drug offender,� Usry told me in an email. “If I never sold that quarter bag then I could never qualify for this kind of sentence.�

According to new court records, that quarter-bag of dirt weed never existed. It has vanished into thin air. All that remains, Usry says, is for the court to treat him like the “event had never taken place.�