§ 11377(a) HS - Possession of Methamphetamine

When facing charges for possession of methamphetamine under California Health & Safety Code § 11377(a), a criminal defense attorney will work to identify and present possible legal defenses to reduce or dismiss the charges. It’s important to understand that even if you were found with methamphetamine, it doesn’t automatically mean you’ll be convicted. There are several legal defenses that may apply depending on the specific circumstances of your case.

In this article, we’ll explore some of the most common and effective defenses to possession of methamphetamine charges in California.

1. Lack of Knowledge or Awareness

To be convicted under § 11377(a) HS, the prosecution must prove that the defendant knew they were in possession of methamphetamine. This means that if the defendant didn’t know they were carrying methamphetamine or if it was planted on them without their knowledge, it may be possible to argue lack of knowledge as a defense.

For example, if a person is unaware that methamphetamine was hidden in their bag, car, or jacket, they may have a valid defense based on the lack of knowledge. In such a case, the defendant would argue that they didn’t possess the methamphetamine voluntarily or knowingly.

2. Illegal Search and Seizure

Under both the U.S. Constitution and California state law, individuals are protected from unreasonable searches and seizures. If law enforcement officers conducted an illegal search or stopped you without probable cause, any evidence obtained as a result of that illegal search, including methamphetamine, may be inadmissible in court.

If your attorney can demonstrate that your rights were violated during the search (for example, the police didn’t have a warrant or probable cause), they may file a motion to suppress the evidence, potentially leading to the dismissal of the charges.

In many cases, the police must have reasonable suspicion to stop you or probable cause to search your property or person. Without it, any evidence discovered in the search may be ruled inadmissible.

3. The Methamphetamine Was Not in Your Possession

Another common defense to possession of methamphetamine charges is that the drug was not actually in your possession. In California, possession refers to having control over the substance, either physically or constructively.

Constructive possession occurs when a person has knowledge of a controlled substance’s location and has the ability to exercise control over it. If the methamphetamine was not in your possession—such as if it was found in someone else’s bag, car, or residence, and you had no access to or control over it—you may be able to argue that you were not in possession of the substance.

For instance, if the methamphetamine was found in a shared apartment or vehicle, and there was no evidence that you had control or knowledge of the drug, this could weaken the case against you.

4. The Methamphetamine Was Not Usable

Under § 11377(a) HS, to be convicted of possession of methamphetamine, the substance must be in a usable amount. This means that mere residue or trace amounts of methamphetamine are not sufficient for a possession charge.

If the substance in question was determined to be only a small, insignificant amount—such as residue in a pipe, on a surface, or in a bag—you could argue that the substance was not in a usable form. Your attorney may call into question whether the quantity of methamphetamine found was enough to be used as a drug or whether it was only trace residue, which should not be considered evidence of possession.

5. Prescription or Medical Use

While methamphetamine is classified as a controlled substance, there are certain medical conditions under which a doctor may prescribe medications containing methamphetamine or similar stimulants.

For example, Desoxyn, a medication containing methamphetamine, is prescribed to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and obesity. If you were prescribed a medication that legally contains methamphetamine and you were in possession of it, you may have a valid prescription defense.

If your attorney can show that you were lawfully using a prescribed medication containing methamphetamine, this could lead to the dismissal of charges or a reduction in penalties. However, it’s important to note that this defense only applies if the possession is consistent with the prescription.

6. False Accusation or Mistaken Identity

In some cases, the defense may argue that you were falsely accused or mistakenly identified as possessing methamphetamine. If the evidence against you is weak, circumstantial, or unclear, your defense attorney may argue that someone else was responsible for possessing the methamphetamine or that you were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Mistaken identity can be a legitimate defense if the police or witnesses made an error in identifying you as the person in possession of the drug. It is also important for your defense attorney to challenge any inconsistencies or credibility issues in the prosecution’s evidence.

7. Entrapment

Entrapment occurs when law enforcement officers induce a person to commit a crime they would not have otherwise committed. If law enforcement officers provided you with an opportunity to possess methamphetamine or pressured you into committing the offense, your attorney may argue that you were entrapped into the crime.

In order to prove entrapment, your defense attorney must show that law enforcement used improper tactics to encourage you to possess methamphetamine. Simply providing an opportunity for someone to commit a crime is not entrapment, but if law enforcement officers coerced or manipulated you into committing the offense, you may have a valid defense.