What is Constructive Possession in a Maryland Drug Case?

If you’re here, you may have been charged with drug possession in Maryland without actually having the drugs on you—and you have no idea how that happened. This is where the idea of “constructive possession” enters the discussion. By better understanding constructive possession, how prosecutors prove it, and potential defenses against it, you can choose your next steps.

At Drew Cochran, Attorney at Law, we know how drug charges can threaten your future. We’re here to advocate for you every step of the way. Call us to set up a consultation with a drug crimes attorney now.

What is possession under Maryland drug law?

Under Maryland law, possession is more than just having drugs on your person or in your pocket. The law specifically recognizes multiple types of possession: actual and constructive.

Actual possession is what most people think of when they think about getting arrested for drug possession. This is what happens when you have drugs in your hand, in your pocket, or otherwise on your person.

Constructive possession involves drugs found somewhere where you had control over them. These charges are often based on your relationship to where the drugs were located.

Actual vs. constructive possession: what’s the difference?

Knowing the differences between actual and constructive possession is crucial. People may think there’s no case against them because they’re thinking about actual possession, only to realize that their case fits the definition of constructive possession perfectly. The sooner you know what you’re dealing with, the sooner you can get the legal help you need from a drug crimes defense lawyer.

Actual possession

Actual possession is the more straightforward concept of the two. This occurs when drugs are found on you or in your immediate physical control. For example, the drugs may be in your hand, pocket, purse, or bag you are carrying. There’s a direct and obvious relationship between you and the drugs.

Constructive possession

Constructive possession is a little more nuanced and complex. This applies when the drugs are not physically on your body, but prosecutors can argue that you had control over them.

For example, prosecutors may argue constructive possession if drugs are found in a car you’re driving, in a shared apartment, or near your personal belongings. This often means relying on circumstantial evidence instead of direct physical possession.

What prosecutors have to prove for constructive possession

To secure a conviction based on constructive possession, prosecutors have to go beyond proving that the drugs were in your vicinity or some place you frequent often. They often need to establish:

• Knowledge: You knew the drugs were present. If you genuinely had no idea that the drugs existed or were there, that can undermine a possession claim.
• Dominion or control: You had the ability to exercise control over the drugs, even if they were not on your person. Control over location may be considered, but on its own, it’s not enough.
• Intent: This is not usually treated as a separate legal element; prosecutors generally try to infer knowledge and control from the circumstances.

It’s important to note that proximity alone is not enough to link you to illegal drugs. Prosecutors have to prove more than “the drugs were in your vicinity” to secure a conviction against you. People often don’t know this, which causes them to panic and start explaining themselves when drugs are found near them—and that panicking and overexplaining can work against you.

Common constructive possession scenarios in Maryland

There are numerous ways constructive possession can come up in everyday situations. Some of the most common scenarios we see include:

• Drugs found in a car with multiple people: This is extremely common during traffic stops. If drugs are found in a trunk, glove compartment, or below a seat when there are multiple people in the vehicle, it can be difficult for police to know who they belong to. There are questions about who had access, control, and knowledge. Drivers often face greater scrutiny, but passengers may also be charged.
• Shared apartment or home: When multiple people share a living space, the discovery of drugs can cause chaos for everyone involved. Drugs found in shared common areas, areas where multiple roommates have access, or in areas where ownership is unclear can lead to multiple people being implicated.
• Group or social settings: Drugs may be found near multiple people during parties or gatherings. For example, if they are found on a table or in a shared area, there may be no clear owner. When this happens, law enforcement may charge multiple people.

Factors considered in constructive possession cases—and why these cases are often challenged

Courts look at the totality of the circumstances when considering constructive possession cases. “Totality of the circumstances” basically means that the court looks at all available evidence and facts to make a decision. Factors that often come into play include:

• Proximity to the drugs
• Ownership or control of the space
• Behavior
• Personal belongings nearby or with the drugs
• Statements made to the police

It is fairly common for constructive possession claims to be challenged. First, it’s common for these cases to involve assumptions based on proximity. If a claim is only propped up by the fact that drugs were found near someone, it may not be as strong as first thought. When there’s unclear ownership in shared spaces, it can be very hard for police to prove that drugs belonged to any one specific person. A lack of direct evidence may cause these cases to be more difficult to prove.

Get the defense you deserve with Drew Cochran, Attorney at Law

If you’re facing drug charges and you don’t know how to protect your future, it’s time to meet with our team. We understand the implicit weaknesses in constructive possession claims, and we’re ready to advocate for you. Contact us online or call us to discuss your case in greater detail.