Criminal defense lawyers deal with two main types of trafficking in cocaine cases. The first concern instances of “actual possession.” The second concern instances of “constructive possession.” For a jury to find you guilty of trafficking in cocaine, it makes no difference if they find you in actual possession of cocaine or constructive possession of cocaine.
Legally speaking, the concept of “possession” occurs when someone has personal charge over an object or exercise has the right of ownership, management, or control over the object.
Under Florida law, possession may either be actual or constructive. Possession may also be exclusive or joint (meaning by one or more people).
When a person is charged with trafficking in cocaine and the allegations concern an instance of actual possession, the prosecutor must prove the following:
- The cocaine was in the defendant’s hand or on his/her person, or
- The cocaine was in a container in the defendant’s hand or his/her person, or
- The cocaine was in such a close proximity to the defendant, that it was in ready reach and was under his/her control.
As you can imagine, mere proximity to cocaine is not enough to establish control over it when the cocaine is not in a place where the defendant has control. For example, if I am a guest in your home and you have cocaine hidden in your closet, and police find me standing next to the closet, it is clear that even though I was next to the location of the cocaine, I clearly did not have control over it because it was your house… a place where I exercise no control.
However, trafficking in cocaine cases that concern allegations of constructive possession in places where the defendant does not exercise control (such as a friend’s house as used in the example above), the prosecution must prove the following:
- The defendant’s control over the cocaine in the place where the defendant does not have control,
and
- The defendant’s knowledge that the cocaine was in his/her presence
As was mentioned earlier, in a trafficking in cocaine case, possession may be exclusive, meaning it is possessed by one person, or it may be joint, meaning it may be possessed by more than one person. This distinction is important because knowledge of the cocaine’s presence is inferred when a person has exclusive possession of the cocaine. However, when cocaine is jointly possessed, knowledge of its presence may not be inferred.
In the next section, we will discuss the prosecutor’s burden as it relates to knowledge in a trafficking in cocaine case.