How to Get a Drug Trafficking Charge Dismissed

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group. We’re a second-generation law firm managed by Todd Spodek, with over 40 years of combined experience defending federal and state drug trafficking cases nationwide. If you’re charged with drug trafficking, dismissal is the best possible outcome – better than acquittal at trial, better than a favorable plea deal. But dismissals don’t happen automatically. They require aggressive lawyering, strategic motion practice, and exploiting weaknesses in the government’s case.

We’re writing this because most defendants don’t know dismissal is possible. They assume once you’re charged, your only options are pleading guilty or going to trial. That’s wrong. Charges get dismissed when evidence is suppressed, when prosecutors can’t prove essential elements, when law enforcement violated your rights, or when the government engaged in misconduct. Your lawyer’s job is creating those opportunities.

Win a Suppression Motion and Collapse the Case

The most common path to dismissal in drug trafficking cases is winning a motion to suppress evidence. If the court excludes the drugs, witness statements, or physical evidence because police obtained it illegally, prosecutors often can’t proceed. No evidence means no case.

Fourth Amendment violations happen constantly in drug cases. Police conduct illegal traffic stops, search vehicles without probable cause, exceed the scope of search warrants, enter homes without warrants or valid exceptions, extend traffic stops into drug investigations without reasonable suspicion.

Take a case where police pull you over for “failure to maintain lane” – a pretextual stop because they suspect drug trafficking. They ask for consent to search, you refuse. They hold you on the side of the road for 45 minutes waiting for a K-9 unit. The dog alerts on your trunk. They find 10 kilograms of cocaine.

That’s an illegal search under Rodriguez v. United States. Police can’t extend a traffic stop beyond the time necessary to complete the traffic-related purpose unless they have independent reasonable suspicion of other crimes. Holding you for 45 minutes waiting for a drug dog violates the Fourth Amendment. Your lawyer files a motion to suppress. The court grants it. The cocaine evidence is excluded. Prosecutors dismiss the charges because they have no admissible evidence.

Challenging Warrantless Searches

Police need a warrant to search your home, vehicle, or property – unless an exception applies. The exceptions are narrow: consent, search incident to arrest, plain view, exigent circumstances, automobile exception based on probable cause.

Prosecutors will argue exceptions applied. Your lawyer challenges those claims. Did you actually consent to the search, or did police enter without asking? Did police have probable cause to believe your vehicle contained contraband, or did they search based on a hunch? Did exigent circumstances really exist, or could police have obtained a warrant?

We’ve won dismissals in cases where police claimed exigent circumstances – they said they heard movement inside a residence and feared evidence was being destroyed. But body camera footage showed no sounds of destruction, no one was fleeing, nothing suggested emergency. The court found no exigent circumstances, suppressed all evidence from the warrantless entry, and prosecutors dismissed the case.

We’ve won dismissals where police claimed the defendant consented to a vehicle search. But the defendant testified he refused consent, and police searched anyway. The government couldn’t prove consent was given. Evidence suppressed. Charges dismissed.

Attack Insufficient Evidence of Knowledge and Intent

Drug trafficking requires proof that you knowingly possessed the drugs with intent to distribute. If prosecutors can’t prove knowledge or intent, they can’t convict – and sometimes they’ll dismiss rather than proceed with a weak case.

Lack of knowledge is a complete defense. If you borrowed a car and drugs were hidden in a secret compartment you didn’t know existed, you didn’t knowingly possess them. If police found drugs in a shared apartment and can’t prove you knew they were there, they can’t establish knowing possession.

Your lawyer attacks knowledge by showing you had no access to the area where drugs were found, other people controlled the location, you have no history of drug trafficking, forensic evidence doesn’t connect you to the drugs (no fingerprints, no DNA on packaging), and communications records show no involvement in drug dealing.

Take a case where police execute a search warrant at your apartment. They find 5 pounds of methamphetamine in your roommate’s bedroom closet. Prosecutors charge both you and your roommate with drug trafficking. Your defense – you had no access to your roommate’s bedroom, the door was always locked, the drugs were in a locked safe inside the closet, you never went in that room. The only evidence against you is that you lived in the same apartment.

That’s insufficient evidence of knowing possession. A judge or jury can’t convict you based solely on proximity. Prosecutors know this. Rather than lose at trial, they’ll dismiss charges against you and proceed only against your roommate.

Challenging Intent to Distribute

Possession with intent to distribute requires proof you planned to sell, transfer, or deliver the drugs to others. Prosecutors rely on circumstantial evidence – drug quantity, packaging in individual portions, scales and baggies, large amounts of cash, text messages about drug sales, multiple cell phones.

But circumstantial evidence can be challenged. If you’re caught with 50 grams of cocaine packaged in a single bag with no scales, no baggies, no messages about sales, prosecutors will argue the quantity itself proves intent to distribute. Your lawyer argues you possessed it for personal use – you’re an addict, you buy in bulk to save money, nothing suggests distribution.

Federal prosecutors have charging guidelines. They’re less likely to pursue trafficking charges for quantities near the bottom of the trafficking range when there’s no additional evidence of distribution. If the evidence is weak and your lawyer demonstrates you have viable defenses, prosecutors might reduce the charge to simple possession or dismiss entirely.

Prove Law Enforcement Misconduct

Prosecutorial misconduct or law enforcement misconduct can result in dismissal. Recent cases show courts will dismiss charges when the government’s conduct was egregious enough to undermine the integrity of the proceedings.

In United States v. Garrett, the Fourth Circuit vacated a guilty plea and remanded the case in February 2025 after discovering “egregious police and prosecutorial misconduct.” The defendant learned that police had engaged in misconduct related to informants and misidentification issues that rendered his plea involuntary.

Misconduct includes – police fabricating evidence, prosecutors withholding exculpatory evidence (Brady violations), law enforcement lying in warrant applications or testimony, prosecutors making false statements to the court, evidence tampering or destruction.

Your lawyer investigates every aspect of the government’s case. Body camera footage, police reports, warrant applications, chain of custody for physical evidence, witness statements. We look for inconsistencies, lies, omissions.

Brady Violations Can Destroy the Prosecution

Under Brady v. Maryland, prosecutors have a constitutional obligation to disclose evidence favorable to the defense. This includes evidence that could impeach government witnesses, evidence suggesting you’re not guilty, evidence that contradicts the government’s theory of the case.

If prosecutors suppress Brady material, that’s grounds for dismissal. We’ve seen cases where prosecutors failed to disclose that their key witness was a paid confidential informant who received $50,000 for cooperating. We’ve seen cases where prosecutors didn’t disclose that the lab technician who tested the drugs was under investigation for falsifying results in other cases.

Discovering Brady violations requires aggressive discovery practice. Your lawyer demands all witness statements, compensation records for confidential informants, personnel files for officers involved in the case, lab certifications and quality control records. When prosecutors resist producing this information, we file motions to compel and argue they’re violating discovery obligations.

If we discover material Brady violations, we move to dismiss the indictment. Courts take these violations seriously. In egregious cases, dismissal with prejudice (meaning charges can’t be refiled) is the remedy.

Challenge the Indictment for Legal Defects

Federal indictments can be challenged on legal and technical grounds. The indictment must charge a federal offense, provide sufficient factual allegations to give you notice of what you’re accused of, and be returned by a properly constituted grand jury.

Indictments get dismissed when they fail to allege facts establishing all elements of the charged offense. For drug trafficking conspiracy, the government must allege an agreement to distribute drugs, your knowing participation in the agreement, and an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. If the indictment doesn’t allege these elements with specificity, it’s legally deficient.

We’ve challenged indictments that charged our client with conspiracy but failed to identify any co-conspirators, describe the scope of the alleged agreement, or specify when the conspiracy began. Vague allegations like “the defendant conspired with others to distribute cocaine” aren’t sufficient. The government needs to provide enough detail that you can prepare a defense.

Statute of limitations problems can result in dismissal. Federal drug trafficking charges generally have a five-year statute of limitations. If the government charges you with offenses that occurred more than five years before the indictment, those charges are time-barred.

Grand Jury Misconduct

The grand jury process is supposed to be fair and independent. If prosecutors engaged in misconduct during grand jury proceedings – presented false evidence, failed to present exculpatory evidence, gave improper legal instructions – the indictment can be dismissed.

Grand jury misconduct is hard to prove because grand jury proceedings are secret. But if your lawyer suspects misconduct, we can file motions for disclosure of grand jury transcripts or request hearings to investigate irregularities.

We’ve seen cases where prosecutors failed to inform the grand jury that their star witness had been promised immunity and money in exchange for testimony. When that came to light, the court found the indictment was tainted and dismissed it.

Force Dismissal Through Speedy Trial Violations

The Speedy Trial Act requires federal criminal trials to begin within 70 days of indictment or arraignment, whichever is later. If the government violates this deadline without valid excludable delay, the court must dismiss the charges.

Certain time periods are excluded from the 70-day clock – delays caused by defense motions, continuances granted for plea negotiations, time needed to determine competency. But prosecutors sometimes miscalculate excludable time or cause delays that aren’t excludable.

Your lawyer carefully tracks the speedy trial clock. If the 70-day period expires and the government hasn’t brought you to trial, we move to dismiss under the Speedy Trial Act. The government has to justify every day of delay by pointing to excludable periods. If they can’t, dismissal is mandatory.

The Sixth Amendment also guarantees the right to a speedy trial. Violations of this constitutional right can result in dismissal with prejudice. Courts consider the length of delay, the reason for the delay, whether you asserted your right to speedy trial, and whether the delay prejudiced your defense.

When Prosecutors Realize They Can’t Win

Sometimes prosecutors dismiss charges on their own initiative. The Justice Manual requires federal prosecutors to evaluate whether charges are “readily provable” and appropriate based on the evidence. If prosecutors determine they can’t prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, they’re supposed to dismiss.

This happens when key witnesses become unavailable, when evidence is weaker than initially believed, when suppression motions exclude critical evidence, when new information undermines the government’s theory. Prosecutors would rather dismiss than lose at trial and create bad precedent.

Your lawyer creates pressure by filing strong motions, taking aggressive discovery, identifying weaknesses in the government’s case, and making it clear you’re going to trial unless charges are dismissed or reduced. Prosecutors know when they have weak cases. If your lawyer convinces them they’ll likely lose at trial, they’ll dismiss or offer a deal to simple possession.

Why Dismissals Require Lawyers Who Fight

Dismissals don’t happen by accident. They happen because your lawyer filed the right motions, made the right arguments, challenged every aspect of the government’s case, and forced prosecutors to confront weaknesses they hoped you wouldn’t notice.

At Spodek Law Group, we’ve secured dismissals in cases other lawyers said were unwinnable. We’ve represented clients in high-profile federal prosecutions that made national news – Anna Delvey’s fraud case that became a Netflix series, the Ghislaine Maxwell juror misconduct case, complex federal conspiracies involving millions of dollars.

We’re not afraid of federal prosecutors or overwhelming evidence. We’ve seen cases that looked hopeless turn into dismissals because we found the constitutional violation, the Brady violation, the insufficient evidence problem that other lawyers missed.

Our loyalty is only to you – not to maintaining friendly relationships with prosecutors. We’ll negotiate when it serves your interests. We’ll fight when that’s the better path. And if we can get your case dismissed, we’ll do whatever it takes to make that happen.

If you’re facing drug trafficking charges – federal or state – contact Spodek Law Group immediately. We’re available 24/7. The sooner we get involved, the better your chances of dismissal.