Both State and Federal Law criminalize the possession, manufacture, and distribution of illegal drugs. At Stockstill & Webre we are passionate about defending drug offenses because most drug offenses involve searches and seizures by law enforcement. Every time there is a search and seizure the 4th Amendment to the Constitution is implicated. At Stockstill & Webre we stay abreast of the numerous Supreme Court and Court of Appeal decisions that interpret the 4th Amendment so that we can zealously defend our clients.

Exclusionary Rule

In Mapp v. Ohio, the United States Supreme Court ruled that if a search and seizure is illegal, the evidence illegally seized is not admissible in court. This rule of law is known as the exclusionary rule. In a drug case, if the drugs seized are not admissible in court, the prosecution cannot prove its case. Thus, the exclusionary rule is a formidable defense in any drug case.

Putting forth a good argument that a search and seizure is illegal requires exhaustive analysis of Supreme Court and Court of Appeal legal precedent. It also involves a thorough investigation of the seizing law enforcement agency’s investigation. At Stockstill & Webre we perform that exhaustive analysis to find favorable legal precedent to support our arguments and our extensive knowledge of police procedure gives us and our clients the edge when we investigate the seizing agency’s investigation.

Other Defenses

In order for a crime to have occurred, a person must “possesses” an illegal substance. There are two types of possession, actual possession and constructive possession. The typical case where possession is an issue arises when law enforcement searches a dwelling or vehicle occupied by numerous people and illegal substances are found. Everyone is arrested. This common scenario is very defendable because 1) our clients usually are not in actual possession of an illegal substance and 2) mere knowledge of the presence of illegal substances is not enough to obtain a conviction. It is very common for us to demonstrate in a cross examination that law enforcement does not have the necessary facts to prove a case of possession.

Lack of knowledge is a defense to drug possession. If you are riding in a vehicle with no knowledge of the fact that there are drugs in the trunk you or not guilty of drug possession. At Stockstill & Webre we have successfully used lack of knowledge defenses at trial and have used it to secure favorable plea bargains for our clients.

Prescription

A valid prescription is a complete defense to a drug charge. We have used the valid prescription defense numerous times to obtain acquittals and dismissals for our client.