Narcotics is one of the main enemies faced by each country. Narcotics abuse
needs to be done prevent and reduce narcotics misuse, which is inseparable from the
role of a judge whose duty is to try the defedant. The judge in making a decision must
have wise judgment so that the decision is based principle of justice. The judge freedom
to determine the tyipe of criminal offense and to impose a lower, equal, or
higherdecision than a letter of public presucuation. The convection for a defendant
depends entirely on the judgment and cofidence of the panel of judges of the evidence
and facts revealed at the trial. In imposing a criminal ofense against a narcotics crime,
the judge must konow and aware to the meaning of the penalties provided and also
know what he is trying to achieve by imposing certain crimes on the perpetrators of
the narcotics misuse. The purpuse of this paper is to find out what factoers are
considered by judge in dropping crimes below the specific minimum limit in narcotics
crime in Case Decision No. 45/Pid.Sus/2016/PN Jnp. Threefore, in this paper, the
author uses normative legal research methods conducted/focused on positive legal
norms in the form of legislation relating to judges’ Consideration Dropping Crimes
Below the Spesific Minimum Limit In Narcotics Crimes. Factors that are considered
by judges in dropping crimes below the spesific minimum limit in narcotics crime on
Decision Number: 45/Pid.Sus/2016/PN Jnp, include: (1) juridicial considerations, (2)
consideration theat are non juridical, (3) aggravating circumstances and mitigating
circumstances. As for the conviction, the judge violates the spesific minimum criminal
provisions due to the Supreme Court Circular Number 03 of 2015 which allow judges
to deviate from in deciding narcotic cases.