What Is the Knowledge Element?
Under Maryland law, a person cannot be convicted of possessing a controlled dangerous substance unless the State proves that the person knew of the presence and illicit nature of the substance. Knowledge is an essential element of possession. The Maryland appellate courts have held that a person ordinarily cannot exercise dominion or control over an object of which the person is unaware. The State may prove knowledge by direct evidence, such as an admission, or by circumstantial evidence. Both types of evidence are given equal weight by the jury or judge. The jury or judge must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew the substance was present and knew it was a controlled dangerous substance. See Dawkins v. State, 313 Md. 638, 547 A.2d 1041 (1988).
How Does Knowledge Apply in Actual Possession Cases?
When a controlled dangerous substance is found on the accused’s person, knowledge is often easier for the State to prove. The location of the substance in a pocket, a bag the person is carrying, or a container the person is holding can support an inference of knowledge. Even in actual possession cases, however, the State must still prove knowledge. A person who is carrying a bag or jacket that belongs to someone else may not know of the presence of a controlled dangerous substance inside it. The surrounding circumstances, including any statements by the accused and the manner in which the substance was packaged, remain relevant.
How Does Knowledge Apply in Constructive Possession Cases?
Constructive possession requires the State to prove both knowledge and the ability and intent to exercise control over the substance. Proximity to a controlled dangerous substance is not enough by itself. The Maryland courts consider several factors, including whether the accused owned or controlled the place where the substance was found, the accused’s proximity to the substance, whether there was evidence of mutual use, and whether the accused had exclusive possession of the location. When multiple people are present, the State must still prove that the accused knew of the substance and intended to exercise control over it. Shared occupancy alone does not establish knowledge. See Taylor v. State, 346 Md. 452, 697 A.2d 462 (1997).
What Evidence Does the State Typically Use?
The State often relies on the location of the substance, the manner of packaging, the presence of paraphernalia, statements by the accused, and any observed behavior. Body-worn camera footage, text messages, and prior statements can also be used to prove knowledge. The absence of such evidence can possibly support an argument that the accused did not know of the substance. The credibility of the witnesses and the consistency of the evidence are important considerations for the fact-finder.
Where Are These Cases Heard in Baltimore County?
Possession of a controlled dangerous substance is charged under Criminal Law § 5-601. A first conviction for possession of CDS other than cannabis carries a maximum penalty of 1 year in prison and a $5,000 fine. Because the maximum penalty exceeds 90 days, the defendant may pray a jury trial and move the case from District Court to the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. Cases begin in District Court in Towson, Essex, or Catonsville and can be moved to the Circuit Court in Towson by a jury-trial prayer. Motions to suppress evidence obtained from an unlawful search are heard in the court that will try the case.
What to Do If You Are Charged
If you are charged with possession of a controlled dangerous substance in Baltimore County, the charging document will show which District Court location was assigned. Shepard Law represents clients facing these charges in Towson, Essex, Catonsville, and the Circuit Court in Towson. Call (410) 648-4008 to schedule a free, confidential consultation. Criminal defense attorney Stephen P. Shepard can review the facts and explain how the State must prove knowledge.
Yes. The State must prove that the accused knew of the presence and illicit nature of the controlled dangerous substance. Knowledge is an essential element of possession under Dawkins v. State.
Generally, no. Proximity to a controlled dangerous substance is not sufficient by itself to prove knowledge or constructive possession. The State must prove both knowledge and the ability and intent to exercise control.
Actual possession means the substance is on the person. Constructive possession means the person knows of the substance and has both the ability and the intent to exercise control over it, even if it is not on the person.
For a first conviction of possession of CDS other than cannabis under § 5-601, the maximum penalty is 1 year in prison and a $5,000 fine.
Cases begin in District Court in Towson, Essex, or Catonsville and can be moved to the Circuit Court for Baltimore County in Towson by a jury-trial prayer.
