Understanding Constructive Possession in Criminal Defense Against Drug Charges

Possession is the legal control or ownership of something, usually some type of object. It is often used in criminal cases and to establish control over illegal substances, weapons, or stolen goods. Possession is a key requirement when charging a person with a drug crime. However, determining possession is not as simple as it sounds. Under the law, possession can be broadly classified into actual and constructive. Actual possession means having physical possession of the drugs, whereas constructive possession is more complicated and challenging to establish.

Understanding Constructive Possession

Constructive possession occurs when a person does not have physical possession of drugs but has the ability to physically possess them. For example, if drugs are found in a car under the driver’s seat, and the driver is the owner of the vehicle, they could be charged with possession under the concept of constructive possession, even though the drugs are not on their person. A key factor in establishing constructive possession is whether the individual knew about the drugs and had the ability to physically possess them.

To establish constructive possession, the prosecution typically needs to prove the following:

  1. Knowledge: The defendant was aware that the drugs were present.
  2. Intent: The defendant intended to possess the drugs.
  3. Control: The defendant had dominion and control over the drugs, even with others.

It can often be difficult to establish these elements, especially when the drugs are found in a location where many people could have access to them, like an apartment or car used by multiple individuals. In these cases, prosecutors may try to show that the defendant was the only one with access or control over a specific location and that the defendant exercised dominion and control over any drugs.

Common Scenarios Involving Constructive Possession

Constructive possession becomes a factor in drug crime cases when the drugs are not discovered on the defendant’s person but in other locations.

Drugs Found in a Vehicle

If drugs are discovered in a vehicle and multiple people have access to the vehicle, the prosecution may argue that the driver or the owner of the vehicle had constructive possession. This can be complicated when drugs are found in a common area, like a glove compartment or trunk, rather than on a specific individual.

Drugs Found in a Shared Residence

In cases where drugs are located in a shared residence, such as an apartment or house, the prosecution may try to establish constructive possession by showing that the defendant had access to the area where the drugs were found. This might include proving that the defendant’s personal belongings were in the same room or the defendant was the primary resident.

Drugs Found in a Workplace

Suppose drugs are discovered in a workplace where multiple employees have access. In that case, the prosecution may argue that the defendant had constructive possession if they had control over the area or if other evidence suggests they were aware of the drugs.

Challenging Constructive Possession in a Defense

One of the most effective ways to defend against a constructive possession charge is to challenge the prosecution’s evidence. There are several strategies that defense attorneys may use.

Lack of Knowledge

The defense might argue that the defendant was unaware of the presence of drugs. The prosecution’s case may fail without clear evidence that the defendant knew about the drugs. For instance, if drugs were found in a rental car, the defense could argue that the defendant did not know about the drugs being in the vehicle.

Lack of Control

The defense might contend that the defendant could not control the drugs. This argument is particularly strong in cases where drugs were found in a location accessed by multiple people. For example, if drugs were found in a common area of a shared apartment, the defense could argue that the defendant did not have exclusive control over the area.

Reasonable Doubt

The defense can also seek to create reasonable doubt by highlighting the possibility that someone else could have had possession of the drugs. This might involve presenting evidence that other individuals had equal or greater access to the location where the drugs were found.

Unlawful Search and Seizure

If the drugs were discovered as a result of an unlawful search and seizure, the defense could move to suppress the evidence. Your attorney would review any search warrant to determine if there is some basis to attack the warrant, or determine if there is a basis to attack a search done without a warrant, and file motion to suppress any evidence seized pursuant to the search. If the court grants a motion to suppress, the prosecution may not use the drugs as evidence, significantly weakening their case.

Lack of Intent

The defense could argue that even if the defendant knew about the drugs, there was no intent to exercise control over them. This argument may be applied in cases where the drugs were in the defendant’s proximity, but there is no evidence to suggest that the defendant intended to possess or control them. Mere proximity to drugs is not enough to show an intent to possess them.

Are You or a Loved One Facing Drug Possession Charges? Don’t Navigate this Alone.

If you or a loved one are facing drug possession charges, it is crucial to seek legal advice from a criminal defense attorney. While constructive possession allows the prosecution to charge individuals with possession of drugs even when they are not found on their person, it also requires the prosecution to prove additional facts to support the charge. You need a defense attorney who will dispute the prosecution’s evidence to reduce or dismiss charges. The experienced team at the Law Office of Seth C. Weston, PLC, will help you explore your options and build a strong defense by challenging evidence to protect your rights. Contact us today at 540-384-4585 to schedule a safe and secure case evaluation.