Federal Drug Crime Attorney

Drug Crimes 21 USCA Section 846 et seq.

In the Federal Courts, some the the largest drug cases are prosecuteduis includes Conspiracy to posses with the intent to distribute as will as the importation of contraband substances. Federal statute 21 USC Section 841 et seq speak to the illegality of these actions and the conviction for one or more of these crimes calls for some of longest prison sesntences.

First however, the government, in or to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly possessed the contraband drugs and had the intent to distribute them. The government may prove this by way of what is kknown as constructive possession, which says that under the facts of a given case, the defendant maintainded dominion and control over the drugs or over the premesis where the drugs are located. Constructive possession may be shown where drugs are found in the posssession of one person who is clearly acting in concert with the defendant. The government is not required to prove that the defendant had knowledge of the particular drug involved, as long as he knew he was dealing in controlled substances.

Protect Your Rights with the Help of a Fort Lauderdale Criminal Lawyer

A person may be convictedof aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine or any other controlled substances even if his actions occur after the principal no longer possessses the drugs. For example, when he shows up to perform survaillance after a delivery. In short, aiding and abbetting encompasses activities intended to ensure the success of the underlying substantive crime.

Each party to a conspiracy may be vicariously liable for substantive offenses committed by a co conspirator during the course of the conspiracy, notwithstanding the party's non participation in the offenses and his or her lack of knowledge of same.

Wether or not the charges of possession wntent to distribute or conspriacy to possess with intent to distribute are substantiated by sufficient evidence is a question for the jury in most cases.

However, mere association with a conspirators not sufficient to establish participation in a conspiracy. In United States v. Leonard, 138 F.3rd 906 (11th Cir. 1998) the court reversed the conviction of a passenger in an automobile who was convicted of possession with intent to distribute as there was no evidence linking him to the drugs that were hidden in the wheel well of the vehicle. Mere presence, standing alone, is insufficient to sustain an individuals guilt in a drug conspiracy crime. For example, in United States v. Derose, 74 F.3rd 1177(11th Cir.1996), the government initiatded a reveerse sting, offering to sell marijuana to the defendants. The defendants were given the key to the trunk of a car which contained the marijuana and told that if they liked the product, they should drive it to a certain location. The defendant looked into the back of the car, examined the marijuana and asa he started to walk away, he was arrested. The court held this to be insufficient effidence against the defendasnt to sustain a conviction for possession with intent to distribute. The record did not show that the defendants either physically placed the marijuana in or removed from the back of the vehicle. Further, the defendant did not have an ignition key to the car and thus never had constructive possession. There was no evidence that he approved the transaction, or the product being offered by the government.

As the crime of conspiracy pertains to all crimes and not just drug related crimes, it will be discussed seperately in hopes of being of most value to the prospective client.