Constructive Possession in Drug Cases: What It Means in Massachusetts
In many Massachusetts drug cases, the most important issue isn’t whether drugs existed—it’s who actually possessed them. Prosecutors often rely on a legal theory called constructive possession to charge people even when drugs were not found on their person.
If you are facing drug charges in Brockton or anywhere in Massachusetts, understanding constructive possession can mean the difference between conviction and dismissal.
What Is Constructive Possession?
Under Massachusetts law, a person can be found guilty of possessing drugs in two ways:
Actual possession – the drugs are physically on you (in your pocket, hand, or clothing), or
Constructive possession – the drugs are not on you, but the Commonwealth claims you had both:
Knowledge of the drugs, and
The ability and intention to exercise control over them
Constructive possession cases are inherently circumstantial—and therefore highly defensible.
Why Constructive Possession Is So Common in Drug Arrests
Police frequently discover drugs in places shared by multiple people, such as:
Cars with more than one occupant
Apartments or houses with roommates
Bedrooms, basements, or common areas
Backpacks, bags, or containers not clearly linked to one person
Rather than determining who truly possessed the drugs, the Commonwealth often charges everyone present and relies on constructive possession to sort it out later.
What the Commonwealth Must Prove
To convict someone based on constructive possession, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant:
Knew the drugs were present, and
*Had the ability and intent to control them
Mere presence near drugs is not enough. Suspicion is not evidence. Association with others is not possession.
Courts repeatedly emphasize that constructive possession cannot be based on guesswork.
Common Weaknesses in Constructive Possession Cases
Constructive possession cases often collapse under scrutiny. Common defense issues include:
1. Multiple People, No Clear Owner
When drugs are found in shared spaces, the Commonwealth must tie your client—not someone else—to the contraband.
2. Lack of Exclusive Control
Access to an area is not the same as control. Shared vehicles, common rooms, or unlocked containers create reasonable doubt.
3. No Evidence of Knowledge
Without admissions, fingerprints, DNA, or incriminating messages, prosecutors often cannot prove the defendant even knew the drugs were there.
4. Overreliance on Police Assumptions
Officers may infer possession based on proximity, nervousness, or “training and experience.” Those assumptions are not proof.
Constructive Possession and Vehicles
Vehicle cases are particularly common in Brockton drug arrests. Key questions include:
Who owned the car?
Where exactly were the drugs found?
Were there multiple occupants?
Did anyone make statements claiming ownership?
Was there independent evidence linking the defendant to the drugs?
The presence of drugs in a car does not automatically establish possession by every occupant.
Constructive Possession vs. Intent to Distribute
Constructive possession is often used as a stepping stone to intent to distribute charges. Prosecutors may argue that:
The defendant constructively possessed the drugs, and
Circumstances suggest intent to sell
If constructive possession fails, the entire case can fail.
How an Experienced Brockton Drug Defense Attorney Fights These Cases
Effective defense involves:
Challenging the search and seizure
Exposing the lack of individualized evidence
Highlighting alternative explanations
Demonstrating shared access and ambiguity
Forcing the Commonwealth to meet its full burden
Constructive possession cases are won by disciplined, detail-oriented lawyering—not assumptions.
Frequently Asked Questions About Constructive Possession
Can I be charged even if the drugs weren’t mine?
Yes—but ownership is not required. The Commonwealth must still prove knowledge and control, which is often difficult.
Is being near drugs enough to convict me?
No. Mere presence is legally insufficient.
What if the drugs were in my house or car?
Access alone does not equal possession. The prosecution must show more.
Do statements matter in constructive possession cases?
Yes. Statements are often the strongest evidence prosecutors have—which is why remaining silent is critical.
Can these cases be dismissed?
Absolutely. Constructive possession cases are among the most frequently dismissed or reduced when properly defended.
Take Action Now
If you are facing drug charges based on constructive possession in Brockton or anywhere in Massachusetts, the case deserves careful, experienced defense.
📞 Call Benzaken, Sheehan & Wood, LLP at (508) 897-0001 for a confidential consultation with a Brockton criminal defense attorney who knows how to dismantle constructive possession cases.
When the Commonwealth relies on inference instead of proof, we hold them to the law.