NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED FEDERAL LAWYERS
Can You Be Arrested for Possession of Narcotics in New York?
|Last Updated on: 6th October 2025, 01:20 am
This article’s goal is to help you understand whether you can be arrested for possession of narcotics in New York. Spodek Law Group is a premier, and top rated, NYC criminal defense law firm who handles federal and state cases. We can help with any narcotics case.
Police found drugs in your apartment during a search, but they’re charging you with possession even though three other people had equal access to the location where drugs were found. What happens in situations like this?
New York’s “automobile presumption” under Penal Law § 220.25(1) only applies to vehicles – in apartments, prosecutors must prove you personally possessed the drugs, not just that you were present where drugs existed.
This distinction is important because constructive possession requires proving both your dominion and control over the drugs AND your knowledge of their presence. When multiple people access the same space, prosecutors struggle to prove individual possession beyond reasonable doubt. The drugs in a common area closet could belong to any roommate, visitor, or previous tenant.
The Lab Report Time Bomb
Building on possession problems, prosecutors must prove the substance is actually illegal drugs through certified lab reports. But New York crime labs face massive backlogs – often 6-8 months for testing. During this delay, your speedy trial clock under CPL § 30.30 keeps running. Prosecutors get 90 days for misdemeanors, 6 months for felonies, excluding only specific delays.
Many attorneys wrongly assume lab delays automatically stop the speedy trial clock. They don’t. Unless prosecutors explicitly state they’re unready due to outstanding lab results AND the court finds “exceptional circumstances,” time counts against them. When they finally get lab results after 5 months, they’ve often blown their speedy trial time.
Request a CPL § 30.30 calculation at every court appearance. Demand prosecutors state readiness on record. When they can’t proceed without lab results but claim readiness anyway, you’ve preserved a dismissal issue. Labs taking normal processing time isn’t “exceptional” – it’s predictable delay prosecutors should anticipate.
The Chain of Custody Weakness – This Matters
Connected to lab delays, every person who handles drug evidence must be documented to establish chain of custody. The officer who seized it, the voucher clerk who stored it, the lab technician who tested it, and everyone in between. Missing one link breaks the chain, making evidence inadmissible and makes it so the strength of your defense increases.
Police property clerks routinely process hundreds of vouchers daily. They can’t remember specific packages months later at trial. Lab technicians test thousands of samples using batch processing. They can’t testify about your specific sample versus others tested that day.
Demand live testimony from every chain of custody witness, not just documentation. When prosecutors can’t produce the midnight shift property clerk who actually received evidence, or the lab tech who performed testing quit months ago, chain of custody fails. Courts increasingly reject paper chains of custody without witness testimony, especially when defendants challenge each link.
The Field Test False Positive Problem
Officers claim field tests showed positive for cocaine, justifying your arrest. But field tests using cobalt thiocyanate react to over 80 substances including common household items. These $2 tests have error rates exceeding 30% according to forensic studies. Yet prosecutors present them as reliable probable cause for arrest and prosecution.
Your attorney should demand the specific field test used, its manufacturer, expiration date, and error rate documentation. Many departments use expired tests or store them improperly, compromising reliability. When field tests contradict later lab results, it undermines the entire investigation’s credibility.
This becomes crucial for marijuana cases after hemp legalization. Field tests can’t distinguish legal hemp (under 0.3% THC) from illegal marijuana. Visual inspection can’t determine THC content. Without expensive lab testing specifically measuring THC percentage, prosecutors can’t prove the substance was illegal rather than legal hemp.
The Treatment Alternative Leverage
Before accepting any plea, explore judicial diversion under CPL Article 216. Even with prior convictions, judges can offer treatment instead of jail for drug possession. The key is demonstrating that addiction, not criminal intent, drove your conduct.
Document any treatment efforts before court – NA meetings, counseling, medical evaluations. Judges view voluntary treatment as taking responsibility. Propose specific treatment plans with identified providers. Courts prefer structured programs over vague promises to get help.
This treatment leverage increases if you’re employed, in school, or have family responsibilities. Judges recognize that incarceration disrupts productive lives while treatment preserves them. Offer to do intensive outpatient treatment while maintaining employment rather than sitting in jail.
Moving Forward Strategically
IF you are looking for legal help, speak to our criminal defense attorneys today. We have over 40 years of combined experience. We understand how to win tough cases. Many people who are struggling to find the right option, often end up realizing we are the right criminal defense law firm to handle your case.
These technical defenses work together to undermine possession prosecutions. When prosecutors can’t prove individual possession among multiple people AND lack lab results within speedy trial time AND have chain of custody gaps AND relied on unreliable field tests, cases crumble.
The critical window is immediately after arrest. Document who had access to where drugs were found. File speedy trial motions before prosecutors realize they’re blown deadlines. Identify missing chain of custody witnesses while memories are fresh. Begin treatment to show rehabilitation regardless of case outcome.
Most importantly, recognize that drug possession prosecutions often resolve through dismissal or treatment programs, not trials. Prosecutors facing technical problems prefer dropping cases to losing at trial. Your goal isn’t proving innocence but exploiting procedural requirements that make prosecution too difficult to pursue.