Proof Issues in Criminal Possession Cases

Usually, proximity and possession are the same thing, for arrest purposes. That’s because the arrest standard of proof (probable cause) is much lower than the criminal trial standard of proof (beyond any reasonable doubt).

The higher standard of proof makes a big difference at drug possession and other illegal possession trials in Loudoun County. Yet despite this advantage, very few lawyers challenge the state’s evidence at trial.

Don’t get us wrong. A pretrial settlement is often the best resolution in a criminal case. Only a good Leesburg criminal defense lawyer properly assesses the pros and cons of the state’s plea bargain offer and determines if the defendant should accept that offer, continue negotiations, or reject that offer and go to trial.

Producing the Substance in Court

At a traffic stop or other police encounter, officers find something illegal and take it. But to produce that substance in court, officers must have had a valid search warrant or a narrow search warrant exception must apply.

We stress that officers must “have had” a warrant. They cannot obtain warrants after the fact. Additionally, a valid warrant must be based on probable cause and issued by a neutral magistrate. The uncorroborated word of a paid informant usually isn’t probable cause, and judge-shopping (taking applications to multiple judges until one signs off on it) undermines neutrality.

Consent may be the most common search warrant exception. During legal stops, police officers often ask owners for consent to search their property. Let’s break down those elements individually.

A legal stop must be based on reasonable suspicion, which is essentially an evidence-based hunch of criminal activity. A hunch alone isn’t reasonable suspicion. An owner must be a legal owner or an apparent owner, like a driver who doesn’t legally own the vehicle. Finally, consent is an affirmative and revocable act.

Proving it Was Illegal

Once again, there’s a difference between proof at the time of arrest and proof in a Loudoun County criminal court.

Usually, officers “field test” substances or assume a pistol grip is part of a firearm. These field tests are usually completely unscientific and realistic air pistols or other toy guns are widely available.

If the case involves an illegal substance, the state must produce a reliable and accurate chemical test that positively identifies the substance. Usually, in gun possession cases, the state must prove the weapon was in good, working order at the time of arrest.

Establishing Legal Possession

We mentioned one element of legal possession (proximity) above. That one element is sufficient for probable cause. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt requires proof of actual knowledge and exclusive control.

Assume Jerry is a passenger in a vehicle. Officer Judy pulls over the vehicle and the driver consents to a search. She finds drugs in the locked glove compartment and arrests Jerry.

Even though the drugs were literally within arm’s reach, Jerry’s Leesburg criminal defense lawyer can successfully challenge legal possession. Unless he saw someone put the drugs in the glove compartment, he probably didn’t know they were there. Furthermore, unless he had the glove compartment key, he didn’t exclusively control its contents.

Connect With a Tough-Minded Loudoun County Lawyer

Illegal possession cases often don’t hold up in court. For a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal defense attorney in Leesburg, contact Simms Showers, LLP, Attorneys at Law. Convenient payment plans are available.

This memorandum is provided for general information purposes only and is not a substitute for legal advice particular to your situation. No recipients of this memo should act or refrain from acting solely on the basis of this memorandum without seeking professional legal counsel. Simms Showers LLP expressly disclaims all liability relating to actions taken or not taken based solely on the content of this memorandum.

Source:

pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/06/14/fewer-than-1-of-defendants-in-federal-criminal-cases-were-acquitted-in-2022/