Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance (7th Degree) - 220.03

Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance in the Seventh Degree is one of the more commonly charged Desk Appearance Ticket matters.  This charge is an A misdemeanor and it comes in a variety of "flavors" in terms of how the case will be perceived by the District Attorney's Office.  It is tempting to assume that because you got a DAT that this 220.03 case is going to be "nothing" or that your 220.03 case will be treated exactly the same as someone else's 220.03 case.  

And yet, 220.03 cases can be perceived by the DA's Office as more or less serious because there are a variety of circumstances and a variety of substances that could be in play.  Being in possession of a single Xanax pill at a concert, for example, may well be perceived differently from being in possession of powder cocaine in a context where the Government believes you have information about the person who they think you bought it from.  Different substances will sometimes draw different approaches and different circumstances will draw different approaches.  The world of 220.03 cases is certainly not a one size fits all world.

Many 220.03 cases involve issues related to search and seizure.  Often there will be claims by the police (disputed by the accused) that substances were found in cars "in plain view".  Similarly, people who are stopped on the street will often have a different explanation from the police for the circumstances of their stop and how they were searched.  These sorts of issues, implicating the Fourth Amendment, are serious legal issues that merit exploring with your lawyer.  

Should you choose to undertake to press these important Constitutional issues in Criminal Court, and should your lawyer be successful, there could be grave consequences to the Government's case.  Nevertheless, pressing such issues should never be undertaken lightly, given the stakes, and given that the law in this area is not as favorable to the citizen as most people assume.  The decision to press search and seizure issues in a possession case such as 220.03 should only be made after close and careful consultation with an experienced criminal defense lawyer who can provide an honest assessment of the realities in play as well as provide a thorough analysis of the law.

In addition, there are potential collateral consequences to 220.03 accusations in the employment, student loan, and immigration contexts.  Some of these consequences could still be in play even if the case could be settled in criminal court with a non-criminal violation or even ACD.  Sometimes, in fact, the ACD, normally a sort of holy grail in the criminal justice system marketplace, can actually create more problems than it solves.

This means that if you have been accused of 220.03 and you have a DAT, you should not be lulled into assumptions that it is "nothing" or believe the nice police officer who arrested you who is willing to engage in the unauthorized practice of law by giving you happy legal advice.  In the end, managed properly, this problem is likely to be a manageable one to be sure.  But it is a problem worth paying attention to and solving well so that it doesn't become something that interferes with your life at a most inopportune time, long after you have forgotten about the criminal case.

I have handled countless 220.03 matters in our more than 20 years practicing criminal defense in New York City.  If you have a 220.03 DAT and would like to consult with me for free, give me a call at 347-612-9830

James Shalley has been practicing criminal defense in New York for more than 30 years.

Call 347-612-9830 for your free consultation with JAMES SHALLEY today.

Criminal Justice Reforms and 220.03 Cases

The criminal justice reforms taking effect on January 1, 2020 will have a significant impact on PL 220.03 (Criminal Possession of a Controlled Substance Seventh Degree) cases because of the changes to rules about discovery.

As noted in this article, 220.03 cases often implicate search and seizure issues, in terms of how the drugs are located by the police, whether by search of the person, search of a vehicle, or search of a home. In the past, it was impossible to have a good idea about what the police claim occurred because the discovery rules mostly kept that information from the defense until the hearing itself occurred (six months later).

This meant that a person who wanted to explore the search and seizure issues in his case was required to forgo all negotiations and play the case out for months until the hearing occurred - and without a real notion about whether the search issues were likely to be successful. It forced a kind of poker playing where an accused person had to gamble on the success of a hearing, and forgo negotiations.

Under the new discovery rules, however, the Government is required to provide all information in their possession, including information that would be favorable to the defense at a hearing about the search within 15 days of the initial appearance on the case.

Therefore, a person who wants to explore the possibility of pursuing a challenge to a search will be in a position to review the police paperwork and other discovery with a lawyer within about two weeks of first appearance. In this way, sensible, realistic determinations can be made about how best to proceed, rather than forcing the defense to essentially gamble over the course of months. Furthermore, it is expressly illegal to punish a defendant for exercising his right to discovery under the new law.

Therefore, if you feel as if the manner in which the police found the drugs in your 220.03 case may have violated your Constitutional privacy interests, under the 2020 discovery rules, you will be able to get a real sense of whether your concerns are justified under the law quite quickly through a careful review of the police paperwork with your lawyer. In this way you and your lawyer will be able to chart the best course forward.