ST. CROIX - Prominent attorney Lee Rohn took the stand in her own defense Tuesday, testifying that evidence against her in her drug trial should be suppressed because federal agents at Rohlsen Airport did not advise her of her legal rights after they found a bag of marijuana in her suitcase.

V.I. Superior Court Presiding Judge Darryl Donohue heard testimony and arguments on Tuesday on the defense motion to suppress evidence in the drug case against Rohn, who is charged with felony possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute it.

At the end of the hearing, Donohue said he would take the matter under advisement and issue an order in writing.

The case, which has made slow progress through the courts, began on March 29, 2003, when Transportation Security Administration screeners at the airport found 13.3 grams of marijuana in Rohn's luggage when she tried to pass through a TSA checkpoint to board a flight to Puerto Rico.

The TSA agents found the marijuana inside a plastic bag tucked into a tennis shoe in her suitcase, according to court documents.

U.S. Customs agents fined her $500 for failing to declare the drugs and referred the matter to territorial officials.

Six days later, on April 4, 2003, Rohn was arrested on a Territorial Court warrant on felony charges of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute. She was released from jail on her own recognizance.

Rohn, who was represented Tuesday by Gordon Rhea, filed the motion to suppress a number of statements TSA and Customs officers said Rohn made during the time that she was in the airport inspection area.

Assistant Attorney General Cornelius Williams called two witnesses: TSA manager Natalie Xavier and former Customs Chief Officer Michael Creek, who were among several federal officers that assisted in processing Rohn after the drugs were found.

Xavier testified that she was the shift supervisor and another TSA agent called her to report that a bag of marijuana was found in a shoe in Rohn's luggage. Xavier said that Rohn asked them to look the other way and that Rohn told them the drugs were for her boyfriend, whom she was going to meet in Puerto Rico. Xavier said Rohn was told to wait while Customs officers were notified.

Creek testified that Rohn was not arrested or in custody when she voluntarily stated that she needed to go to Puerto Rico and told them she had the marijuana only because her boyfriend had asked her to bring it to him.

Creek said that Rohn was not in custody during the time she made the statement, so she had not been read her rights.

Rohn took the stand as the only witness for the defense and testified that she had never made any statements to TSA officers and only spoke with Creek after she was questioned by him.

She said he began asking her questions but never advised her of her Miranda rights.

Rohn said Creek was hostile to her and told her on several occasions that she should have known better and that she was going to jail. She said his report had a number of errors.

On the stand, Rohn did not deny having the marijuana but said that she was extremely frustrated and distraught because her boyfriend's father had been in an accident and was in critical condition at a Puerto Rico hospital.

She choked back tears when she testified that she was frustrated and cooperated because she needed to get to Puerto Rico quickly.

According to a V.I. Police Department arrest affidavit, Rohn pleaded with a TSA screener to pretend she had not seen the drugs. The affadavit also said that Rohn later admitted to federal agents that the drugs belonged to her and said she was taking them to Puerto Rico to give to her boyfriend.

Rohn appealed the local criminal charges, arguing that she would be subjected to double jeopardy because she already had paid a Customs fine at Rohlsen Airport for not declaring the marijuana hidden in her luggage.

In January 2007, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected that argument and cleared the way for the V.I. Justice Department to prosecute Rohn on drug charges.

In an opinion published Jan. 14, a three-judge federal appellate panel ruled that the fine levied on Rohn on March 29, 2003, by U.S. Customs was distinct from the territory's law against possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute and that a local prosecution does not violate her constitutional double jeopardy protection against being penalized twice for the same offense.

A District Court appellate panel had come to the same conclusion, upholding Superior Court Judge Darryl Donohue's November 2004 ruling that the U.S. Customs fine and the subsequent drug charge brought by the Justice Department are separate and distinct.

Rohn has filed a libel lawsuit against The Daily News over the newspaper's reporting of the charges against her and stories about the progress of the case. That lawsuit is pending.