Can I Be Arrested for Drugs That Aren’t Mine?
Police searches sometimes turn up illegal substances in homes, cars, or backpacks belonging to innocent people. Understanding state laws on drug possession and the defenses available when you lack ownership is key to avoiding wrongful arrest and conviction.
At the Murrysville, Pennsylvania, office of The Law Offices of James Crosby, clients often ask whether they can face charges when drugs are discovered that aren’t theirs. Individuals in this situation can rest assured that we’re here to provide the support they need.
Protecting your rights begins with knowing how Pennsylvania defines possession, what prosecutors must prove, and how to demonstrate a lack of knowledge or control over found substances. The sections below explain those rules, outline potential defenses, and offer practical steps to guard against being charged for someone else’s drugs.
Learn About Drug Possession Under Pennsylvania Law
Drug possession occurs when someone has actual or constructive control over a controlled substance. Actual possession means holding or carrying drugs directly, while constructive possession involves having the power and intent to control drugs kept nearby. Courts look at factors like proximity, access, and behavior to decide if someone had constructive possession.
Because drugs aren’t always on a person’s body, being near others who carry substances can lead to charges. Demonstrating that you neither owned nor knew about the drugs found in shared spaces is critical. Clear testimony about your lack of involvement and evidence of others’ sole access helps refute constructive possession claims.
Elements Prosecutors Must Prove
Before bringing drug possession charges, prosecutors must establish each required element beyond a reasonable doubt. They need to show you had control or custody of the substance and were aware of its presence, intended to exercise authority over it, and knew it was illegal. Meeting these criteria gives them the basis to proceed with charges:
Control or custody: Evidence that the defendant physically held or had dominion over the drugs.
Awareness of presence: Proof that the defendant knew the substances were there and recognized their illicit nature.
Intent to exercise control: Circumstantial factors indicating the defendant planned to use or distribute the drugs.
Knowledge of illegality: Demonstrations that the defendant understood the material was unlawful.
When one or more elements can’t be proven, the state’s case weakens significantly. Highlighting gaps in the prosecution’s evidence often leads to reduced charges or outright dismissal of drug possession counts.
Constructive Possession in Shared Spaces
In shared residences, vehicles, or other communal areas, drugs found in common locations can implicate anyone present. Constructive possession claims often hinge on assumptions rather than clear proof. Showing you never accessed the specific location where drugs were hidden and explaining how others had exclusive control undercuts those assumptions.
Documenting who lives in the residence, who drives the vehicle, and who has keys or access codes provides concrete evidence. Surveillance footage or witness statements indicating that someone else handled the container or accessed the space alone further strengthens the defense against wrongful constructive drug possession charges.
Defenses Available in Drug Possession Cases
Pennsylvania law allows several defenses when you’re accused of possessing drugs you neither owned nor controlled. Raising these affirmative defenses early can shift the burden and expose weaknesses in the prosecution’s theory:
Innocent owner defense: Applies when you own the property but had no knowledge of the hidden substances.
Lack of access argument: Shows you couldn’t physically reach or direct how the drugs were stored or used.
Mistaken identity: Challenges witness or officer assertions about who handled the drugs.
Entrapment: Argues law enforcement induced you to commit an offense you wouldn’t have otherwise.
Successfully invoking these defenses requires prompt evidence gathering—such as access logs, witness statements, or surveillance footage—that proves you lacked involvement. Courts often grant favorable rulings when defenses expose reasonable doubt.
Proving Lack of Knowledge and Control
Arguing innocence often comes down to demonstrating you neither knew about nor intended to exercise control over found drugs. Witness testimony from roommates, passengers, or visitors can establish that someone else handled or hid the substances. Photographs of locked compartments or distinct storage areas further illustrate your lack of access.
Providing character evidence and a history of lawful behavior may help, but the strongest proof is objective documentation. Delivery records, receipts, or digital logs showing you were elsewhere when someone else placed drugs can decisively undermine possession allegations.
Steps to Protect Yourself From Wrongful Arrest
During any law-enforcement encounter, taking measured steps can determine whether you’re charged for drugs you didn’t possess. Proactively asserting your rights and creating a clear record of the search sets the stage for challenging wrongful allegations:
Request itemized inventory: Ask officers to list every item they seize, creating an official record you can contest.
Document the search: If permitted, use your phone to record video or photos showing where drugs were found.
Identify witnesses: Note names of anyone present who can testify about who had access to the area.
Invoke your right to counsel: Politely decline to answer incriminating questions until you’ve spoken with an attorney.
By insisting on detailed inventories, capturing visual evidence, securing witness information, and invoking legal rights, you build a factual foundation that exposes gaps in the prosecution’s case. Gathering this documentation promptly preserves critical evidence and highlights any procedural missteps by officers.
Evidence Suppression and Exclusionary Rule
When police seize drugs without a valid warrant or a recognized exception, that search may violate the Fourth Amendment.
Under the exclusionary rule, evidence obtained through unconstitutional searches is inadmissible at trial. Without those seized substances, prosecutors often lack the proof needed to support drug possession charges. Filing a motion to suppress can therefore be the decisive step in dismantling a wrongful drug case.
To succeed on a suppression motion, defense counsel must demonstrate the absence of probable cause or that no exception applies. Judges examine warrant affidavits, the scope of the search, and any consent or exigent circumstances.
If the court finds the seizure unlawful, all tainted evidence is excluded. This outcome frequently leads to reduced or dismissed charges when core proof vanishes.
Impact of Prior Criminal Records
Courts routinely consider a defendant’s criminal history when setting bail, plea offers, and sentencing in drug possession cases. Previous convictions can trigger harsher bail conditions and mandatory minimums under repeat-offender laws.
These enhancements apply even if new charges involve substances you didn’t own. Facing past records can thus complicate defense efforts and raise the stakes of a possession accusation.
Defense attorneys can mitigate this impact by challenging the relevance or accuracy of prior convictions. Pretrial motions may exclude distant or legally flawed records from jury consideration. Emphasizing rehabilitation efforts and the time elapsed since old offenses helps persuade judges to exercise leniency.
Such strategies limit the influence of past convictions on current sentencing and improve prospects for a fair outcome.
Post-Conviction Relief and Expungement Options
If you’ve been convicted despite a strong defense, Pennsylvania law offers routes to clear or seal your record, helping you move past wrongful convictions and protect future opportunities:
Expungement of records: Allows eligible first-time offenders to petition for complete deletion of conviction records.
Collateral relief petitions: Seeks to vacate or reduce sentences when new evidence or legal errors surface.
Record sealing for summary offenses: Permits sealing of certain low-level convictions, limiting public access to files.
Pursuing post-conviction relief requires careful timing and documentation, as statutes set strict eligibility windows. A successful petition or expungement not only restores rights but also removes many barriers to employment, housing, and professional licensing.
Call Us Today
If you’ve been arrested or investigated in Murrysville, Harrison City, Greensburg, Latrobe, Westmoreland County, or anywhere in Pennsylvania for possession of drugs you didn’t own or use, contact The Law Offices of James Crosby: Murrysville Office for a free consultation. We’ll review police conduct, challenge improper searches, and build defenses that protect your freedom and reputation. Call today.