Drug charges in Indiana cover a wide range of offenses, from simple possession to complex dealing or manufacturing cases. The state takes these charges seriously, with penalties that can include jail time, hefty fines, and a lasting criminal record. Whether you’re accused of possessing marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, or prescription drugs without a valid prescription, the consequences depend on factors like the type and amount of the drug, your criminal history, and the circumstances of your arrest. As an Indiana criminal lawyer who focuses on drug cases, I focus on analyzing every detail of your situation to challenge the prosecution’s case and seek reduced charges or dismissal.

Indiana law classifies controlled substances into schedules, with Schedule I drugs (like heroin or LSD) considered the most dangerous and carrying the harshest penalties. Marijuana, while decriminalized in some states, remains illegal in Indiana for recreational use, and possession or dealing can still lead to significant legal trouble. For example, possessing even a small amount of marijuana (less than 30 grams) is a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to 180 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. Larger amounts or intent to deal can escalate to felonies, with prison sentences ranging from six months to seven years or more. Drug dealing charges, such as manufacturing or distributing controlled substances, often carry even stiffer penalties, especially if the activity occurs near a school or park.

As a drug lawyer in Indiana, I’ve seen how these charges can disrupt lives, affecting jobs, relationships, and future opportunities. My approach is to dive deep into the specifics of your case, looking for weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence, such as improper searches, lack of probable cause, or issues with possession claims. By leveraging Indiana’s legal framework and my experience as a criminal defense attorney, I aim to minimize the impact of these charges on your life.

Types of Possession in Indiana Drug Cases

When it comes to drug possession charges, Indiana law distinguishes between two types of possession: actual and constructive. Understanding the difference is crucial because it shapes how the prosecution builds its case and how your drug possession lawyer can defend you. Let’s explore each type in detail.

Actual Possession under Indiana Law

Actual possession is straightforward—it means you physically have the contraband on you. For example, if police find marijuana in your pocket, cocaine in your bag, or a handgun in your hand, that’s actual possession. In these cases, the prosecution typically has an easier time proving you possessed the item because it was directly on your person. I’ve handled countless cases where clients were caught with drugs or other contraband in plain sight, like a minor holding a beer can or a defendant with a handgun tucked in their waistband.

The defense in actual possession cases often hinges on challenging the legality of the search or seizure. For instance, if police searched you without a warrant or probable cause, I can argue that the evidence should be suppressed. I’ve seen claims like the “not my pants” defense, where a defendant argues the clothing (and drugs inside) didn’t belong to them, but this rarely succeeds in court. As your Indiana criminal lawyer, I’ll focus on stronger strategies, like questioning the officer’s conduct or the chain of custody for the evidence, to weaken the prosecution’s case.

Constructive Possession under Indiana Law

Constructive possession is trickier and often more challenging for the state to prove. It occurs when you don’t physically have the contraband on you but have the intent and capability to control it. For example, if drugs are found in a car you’re driving or an apartment you’re staying in, the prosecution may argue you constructively possessed them. Indiana case law, like Cahisa Jones v. State (881 N.E.2d 1095, Ind. App. 2008), sets a high bar for proving constructive possession, requiring more than just proximity to the contraband.

The courts look at specific factors to establish constructive possession, including:

1. Incriminating statements by the defendant – Did you say something that suggests you knew about or controlled the drugs?

2. Attempted flight or furtive gestures – Did you try to flee or act suspiciously when police approached?

3. Location of drugs in settings suggesting manufacturing – Were the drugs found in a place associated with drug production, like a home with scales or packaging materials?

4. Proximity of the contraband to you – How close were you to the drugs?

5. Contraband in plain view – Were the drugs easily visible to you?

6. Mingling of contraband with your belongings – Were the drugs mixed with items you clearly own?

In Cahisa Jones, the defendant was in a car with a handgun on the back seat, about two feet away. The court reversed the conviction because the evidence only showed proximity and plain view—not enough to prove intent and control. Similarly, in Brent v. State (957 N.E.2d 648, Ind. App. 2011), the court found insufficient evidence when police assumed a defendant discarded marijuana but couldn’t prove it was theirs. These cases highlight how I, as your drug possession lawyer, can challenge constructive possession by showing the state’s evidence doesn’t meet the legal threshold.

I’ve cited Cahisa Jones more than any other case in my practice because it’s a powerful tool for defending clients against weak constructive possession claims. If you’re facing a constructive possession charge, I’ll scrutinize the prosecution’s evidence, looking for gaps in their proof of your intent or control over the drugs. This approach has helped many clients avoid convictions when the state’s case relies on shaky assumptions.

Indiana’s Approach to Drug Possession and Dealing Penalties

Indiana’s drug laws are strict, and the penalties for possession and dealing vary based on the substance, quantity, and circumstances. For possession, even small amounts of drugs like marijuana can lead to misdemeanor charges, while larger amounts or more dangerous substances like methamphetamine or heroin often result in felony charges. For example, possessing less than 30 grams of marijuana is a Class B misdemeanor, but possessing 30 grams or more with intent to deal can be a Level 6 felony, carrying up to 2.5 years in prison.

Drug dealing charges, such as manufacturing, distributing, or possessing with intent to deliver, are treated even more harshly. A Level 5 felony for dealing a Schedule I or II substance (like cocaine or meth) can mean 1-6 years in prison and fines up to $10,000. If the dealing occurs within 500 feet of a school, park, or youth program center, penalties increase with “enhancing circumstances.” As an Indiana drug dealing attorney, I focus on challenging these enhancements, which can significantly inflate sentences, by questioning the location evidence or the intent to deal.

Another critical factor is your criminal history. Indiana courts often impose harsher sentences for repeat offenders, but as your criminal defense attorney, I can negotiate to minimize prior convictions’ impact or argue for alternative sentencing options like probation or treatment programs. My experience with Indiana’s sentencing guidelines allows me to advocate for outcomes that avoid excessive punishment while addressing the court’s concerns.

Deferral Programs in Indiana Drug Cases

One of the most effective tools for resolving drug possession cases in Indiana is a deferral program, which can keep a conviction off your record. A deferral, formally called a “pretrial diversion” or “deferred prosecution,” allows eligible defendants to avoid a formal conviction by completing certain requirements, such as probation, community service, or drug treatment. If you successfully complete the program, the charges are dismissed, and your record stays clean—a huge win for your future job prospects and personal life.

In Indiana, deferral programs are often available for first-time offenders charged with low-level drug possession, like misdemeanor marijuana cases. The eligibility criteria vary by county, but prosecutors typically consider factors like your criminal history, the nature of the charge, and your willingness to comply with program conditions. For example, you might be required to submit to random drug tests, attend counseling, or pay program fees. As your Indiana drug possession lawyer, I’ll negotiate with prosecutors to secure a deferral when possible, emphasizing your clean record or commitment to rehabilitation.

I’ve helped many clients take advantage of deferral programs to avoid the long-term consequences of a drug conviction. For instance, in a recent case, a client charged with possessing a small amount of marijuana was accepted into a diversion program in Marion County. After completing six months of probation and a drug education course, the charges were dismissed, and they avoided a criminal record. If you’re eligible, I’ll guide you through the process, ensuring you meet all requirements and maximize your chances of a successful outcome.

However, deferrals aren’t guaranteed, and prosecutors may resist offering them in dealing cases or for defendants with prior convictions. In such cases, I’ll explore other defenses, like challenging the evidence or negotiating for reduced charges, to achieve a similar result. My goal as your criminal lawyer is to find every possible avenue to protect your future.

Drug Treatment as an Alternative to Incarceration in Indiana

Indiana recognizes that drug addiction often drives possession and dealing charges, and many courts offer treatment programs as an alternative to jail time. These programs, sometimes called “problem-solving courts” or “drug courts,” focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. If you’re struggling with substance abuse, enrolling in a court-approved drug treatment program can lead to reduced charges, probation instead of jail, or even dismissal of your case upon successful completion.

Drug courts in Indiana, like those in Marion, Hamilton, or Allen Counties, require participants to undergo regular drug testing, attend counseling or therapy, and meet with a judge periodically to track progress. These programs are intensive, often lasting 12-24 months, but they’re designed to address the root causes of drug-related crimes. As your drug lawyer, I’ll advocate for your entry into a drug court program if it fits your situation, presenting evidence of your commitment to recovery to persuade the court.

For example, in a case involving a client charged with possession of methamphetamine, I successfully argued for their admission into a drug court program in Lake County. They completed a year-long treatment plan, including inpatient rehab and outpatient counseling, and the court dismissed their charges. This outcome not only kept them out of jail but also helped them rebuild their life free from addiction.

Treatment programs aren’t just for possession cases. Even in dealing cases, where penalties are harsher, I can sometimes negotiate for treatment as part of a plea deal, especially if the dealing was driven by personal addiction rather than profit. Indiana’s drug courts have a strong track record—studies show participants are less likely to reoffend compared to those who serve jail time. By working with treatment providers and the court, I’ll ensure you have the support needed to succeed in these programs.

Challenging the Prosecution’s Case: Lessons from Indiana Case Law

Indiana case law provides powerful tools for defending drug possession and dealing charges, particularly when it comes to possession disputes. Let’s look at key cases that shape how I, as your Indiana criminal defense attorney, build your defense.

In Cahisa Jones v. State (881 N.E.2d 1095, Ind. App. 2008), the defendant was charged with possessing a handgun found in a car he was a passenger in. The gun was on the back seat, about two feet away, in plain view. The court reversed the conviction, ruling that proximity and plain view alone weren’t enough to prove constructive possession. The state needed to show intent and capability to control the item, which they failed to do. This case is a cornerstone of my defense strategy, as I often use it to challenge weak constructive possession claims in drug cases. If drugs were found in a shared space, like a car or apartment, I’ll argue the prosecution hasn’t met the burden of proof under Cahisa Jones.

Similarly, in Brent v. State (957 N.E.2d 648, Ind. App. 2011), the defendant was accused of possessing marijuana after police saw a baggie thrown from a car. The officer admitted he didn’t witness the defendant discard it, and the court found the evidence insufficient to prove possession. This case underscores the importance of direct evidence. As your drug possession lawyer, I’ll scrutinize police reports and witness testimony to expose gaps like those in Brent, especially in cases where the prosecution relies on assumptions.

Another key case, Moore v. State (613 N.E.2d 849, Ind. App. 1993), involved cocaine found in an apartment where the defendant was present. Despite the drugs being in plain view and the defendant’s proximity, the court ruled the evidence didn’t prove constructive possession because multiple people were in the apartment, and there was no clear link to the defendant. This case is critical when drugs are found in shared spaces, as I can argue the prosecution can’t pin the contraband on you without stronger evidence.

These cases show that Indiana courts demand solid proof for possession convictions, especially in constructive possession scenarios. As your drug dealing attorney, I’ll apply these precedents to challenge the state’s case, whether it’s questioning the legality of a search, the reliability of witnesses, or the sufficiency of evidence linking you to the drugs.

Why You Need an Indiana Drug Possession or Dealing Lawyer

Facing drug charges without an experienced Indiana criminal lawyer is risky. The prosecution will work to build a strong case, often relying on police reports, lab results, or witness statements that may not tell the full story. My job is to level the playing field by thoroughly investigating your case, from the initial stop or search to the evidence presented at trial. I’ve handled cases across Indiana, from Indianapolis to Fort Wayne, and I know how local courts and prosecutors operate.

As your drug lawyer, I’ll explore every defense option, including:

• Challenging the search and seizure: If police violated your Fourth Amendment rights, I can file a motion to suppress evidence, potentially getting your case dismissed.

• Disputing possession: Using cases like Cahisa Jones and Brent, I’ll argue the prosecution can’t prove you possessed the drugs, especially in constructive possession cases.

• Negotiating for leniency: Whether it’s securing a deferral program, drug court, or a plea to lesser charges, I’ll advocate for outcomes that minimize penalties.

• Fighting at trial: If your case goes to trial, I’ll present a compelling defense, cross-examining witnesses and challenging the prosecution’s evidence.

Drug charges can have lifelong consequences, but with the right criminal defense attorney, you can fight back. I’m committed to providing personalized, aggressive representation to protect your rights and future.

How Indiana Drug Attorney & Criminal Dealing Lawyer Jeff Cardella Can Help You 

If you’re facing drug possession or dealing charges in Indiana, time is critical. The sooner you contact an experienced Indiana drug possession and dealing criminal lawyer, the better your chances of a favorable outcome. I offer free consultations to review your case, explain your options, and start building your defense. Whether you’re eligible for a deferral program, need help accessing drug treatment, or want to challenge the prosecution’s evidence, I’m here to guide you every step of the way.

Don’t let a drug charge define your future. As your criminal defense attorney, I’ll use my knowledge of Indiana law, experience with cases like Cahisa Jones and Brent, and dedication to your case to fight for the best possible result. Call me today to discuss your situation, and let’s start working toward a resolution that keeps you moving forward.