How to Fight Federal Conspiracy with Intent to Distribute Drug Charges?

Views: 27400

One of the most common federal charges against criminals is federal conspiracy with intent to distribute drugs, which is covered in  21 USC 841 and 21 USC 846 of the Federal Code. If you are facing these serious charges, it is very important for you to understand the laws underlying this statute.

You are facing serious criminal penalties, which will depend upon the drugs involved, your criminal record, and whether you were in a school zone when arrested. You also could be facing a mandatory minimum sentence of up to 10 years.

What the Government Must Prove

To be convicted of drug possession with intent to distribute, the government has to prove the two following things beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • That you intended to commit drug possession with intent to distribute
  • You did an act that was a major step towards doing that crime

This federal crime requires that you intended to engage in criminal behavior and the performance of criminal acts which make up a substantial step towards committing the offense.

A substantial step has to be something more than just preparing to do the crime. However, it can be less than the last act that was needed before you actually committed the crime of drug possession with the intent to distribute. For the behavior to be able to be punished as an attempt, it has to be essential to the commission of the crime and be of a nature that a reasonable person would conclude beyond reasonable doubt that it was done with a plan to violate the law.

So, for the federal government to prove that you are guilty of conspiracy of attempted drug possession with intent to distribute, it must prove that you engaged in several preliminary steps that make the plan a criminal one.

Controlled Substances Under Federal Statute

The phrase controlled substances refers to drugs that are included in Schedules I, I, III, IV or V, which is found in part B of 21 USC 812. This term does not refer to spirits or tobacco.

The government does not have to prove the actual quantity of the controlled substance that you possessed. The government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a measurable quantity of the controlled substance was possessed by you.

The government does not need to prove that you knew the exact nature of the drug that was in your possession. However, the government must prove that you did have knowledge that some sort of illegal drug was in your possession.

What Does ‘Possess’ Mean Under Federal Law?

The term ‘to possess’ means to have control over something at a given period of time. Under federal law, there are several types of possession: constructive, sole and joint.

Under the law, possession is considered actual when you knowingly had physical control over something. Possession is known as constructive when you did not have direct physical control over the drug, but you can control it and intend to do so, often through another suspect.

Possession can be exercised by one person alone, while is known as sole possession, or it can be exercised in joint fashion, when shared by two or more suspects.

To possess a drug with intent to distribute means that you possessed it with the intent to deliver or to transfer the possession of the drug to another person.

What is Your Defense?

Your lawyer will look at the circumstances of the arrest, and if the evidence was obtained illegally. Your attorney also will look at why you were charged with possession with intent to distribute at all. In some cases, police made incorrect assumptions, and a good attorney may be able to get your charges reduced or dismissed.

In addition to these fundamental aspects, it is also essential to understand the broader implications and recent cases that shed light on how these laws are applied. Federal conspiracy charges involving drug distribution have significant legal precedents and ongoing cases that provide further insight.

Recent Legal Cases and Their Implications

Several high-profile cases in recent years have highlighted the complexities and rigorous enforcement of federal drug distribution laws. These cases not only illustrate the severity of the penalties involved but also underscore the federal government’s commitment to combating drug trafficking and related conspiracies.

United States v. Martinez

In the case of United States v. Martinez, the defendant was charged with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. The prosecution presented evidence that included intercepted communications, surveillance, and testimonies from co-conspirators. The court found that Martinez had played a crucial role in the distribution network, coordinating shipments and managing finances.

Martinez’s defense argued that he was merely an intermediary with no significant control over the drug operations. However, the prosecution successfully demonstrated that his actions constituted a substantial step towards the distribution of methamphetamine. Martinez was ultimately convicted and sentenced to 15 years in federal prison.

United States v. Johnson

In another notable case, United States v. Johnson, the defendant was involved in a large-scale cocaine distribution ring. Johnson was charged under 21 USC 841 and 21 USC 846 for his role in orchestrating the transportation and sale of cocaine across state lines. The prosecution’s case hinged on wiretap evidence and financial records linking Johnson to the drug transactions.

Johnson’s defense attempted to discredit the wiretap evidence, claiming it was obtained without proper authorization. However, the court ruled that the wiretaps were lawfully conducted and provided critical evidence of Johnson’s intent to distribute cocaine. Johnson was convicted and received a 20-year sentence.

United States v. Li

The case of United States v. Li highlighted the intersection of drug trafficking and international money laundering. Li was charged with conspiracy to distribute heroin and laundering the proceeds through complex financial transactions involving foreign banks. The prosecution used forensic accounting to trace the flow of money and establish Li’s involvement in the distribution network.

Li’s defense argued that the financial transactions were legitimate business activities unrelated to drug trafficking. However, the prosecution’s evidence, including testimony from financial experts and co-conspirators, proved otherwise. Li was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in federal prison, highlighting the severe penalties for both drug distribution and associated financial crimes.


Federal conspiracy charges involving drug distribution are among the most serious criminal offenses under U.S. law. The government must prove intent and a substantial step towards the crime, which often involves intricate investigations and substantial evidence. Recent legal cases, such as United States v. Martinez, United States v. Johnson, and United States v. Li, demonstrate the complexities and severe penalties associated with these charges.

For individuals facing such charges, understanding the legal framework and the specific requirements for conviction is crucial. A robust defense strategy, often involving scrutinizing the evidence and challenging the methods used by law enforcement, can make a significant difference in the outcome. However, given the severe penalties, including mandatory minimum sentences, it is essential to seek experienced legal counsel to navigate these challenging legal waters.

The ongoing efforts by federal authorities to combat drug distribution and related conspiracies underscore the importance of these laws in maintaining public safety and disrupting criminal networks. As the legal landscape evolves, staying informed about recent cases and legal precedents remains critical for those involved in or affected by federal drug conspiracy charges.