Drug Cases

Texas Drug Crime Defense Attorneys | Dotzel Calhoun

Dotzel Calhoun represents individuals accused of serious drug offenses in Collin County, Dallas County, Tarrant County, Denton County, and throughout North Texas. We defend cases involving possession of controlled substances, possession with intent to deliver, manufacture or delivery of controlled substances, and other felony drug allegations involving substances such as methamphetamine, cocaine, fentanyl, and prescription drugs.

Attorneys Justin Dotzel and Luke Calhoun are former Collin County Chief Felony Prosecutors who have handled thousands of criminal cases and nearly 200 jury trials. Drug prosecutions frequently involve much more than simply determining whether an illegal substance was found. Search and seizure law, ownership and control of the drugs, electronic evidence, alleged drug transactions, confidential informants, firearms, and the accused’s statements can all become important issues.

CASE RESULT

Deferred Adjudication Probation for Client with Multiple First Degree Felony Drug Cases

Dotzel Calhoun represented a client in a North Texas suburb who faced approximately seven felony drug cases, five of which were first degree felony charges for Possession with Intent to Deliver Controlled Substances. Given the number and seriousness of the charges, the client faced substantial potential prison exposure.

After evaluating the case, we determined that cooperation with law enforcement offered an opportunity to significantly improve the client’s position. Rather than allowing the client to simply speak with investigators on her own, we coordinated a detailed interview with law enforcement and helped prepare the client for that process. During the interview, she provided substantial and useful information that assisted law enforcement in other investigations.

The case continued for a significant period of time while the value of that cooperation was evaluated. Ultimately, the District Attorney’s Office offered the client deferred adjudication community supervision rather than a prison sentence.

The case demonstrates why cooperation in a serious drug prosecution can sometimes be valuable—but also why it should be approached strategically and with the assistance of counsel. A person who speaks with law enforcement without understanding the risks may make admissions without receiving any meaningful benefit in return.
Past results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in a future case. Every case depends on its own facts and circumstances

What Are the Most Common Drug Charges in Texas?

Texas drug offenses are primarily governed by Chapter 481 of the Texas Health and Safety Code. Common charges include:

• Possession of a Controlled Substance: The State alleges that the accused knowingly or intentionally possessed an illegal controlled substance.
• Possession With Intent to Deliver: The State alleges not only that the accused possessed the drugs, but intended to transfer or deliver them to another person.
• Manufacture or Delivery of a Controlled Substance: These cases may involve allegations that the accused sold, transferred, manufactured, or otherwise delivered an illegal controlled substance.

The seriousness of a Texas drug charge depends heavily on the particular substance involved, the weight of the substance, the alleged conduct, prior criminal history, and whether aggravating circumstances apply. For many controlled substances, Texas law increases the punishment dramatically as the alleged weight increases.

What Is Possession of a Controlled Substance in Texas?

To convict someone of possession, prosecutors generally must prove that the accused knowingly or intentionally exercised actual care, custody, control, or management over the controlled substance.

Simply being close to illegal drugs does not automatically mean a person possessed them. That distinction becomes particularly important when drugs are discovered in a vehicle, house, hotel room, or other location occupied by multiple people.

What Are “Affirmative Links” in a Texas Drug Case?

When drugs are discovered somewhere that is not exclusively controlled by the accused, prosecutors generally must present additional evidence connecting the accused to the drugs.
Texas lawyers have traditionally referred to this as the “affirmative links” doctrine.

Evidence prosecutors may use to establish a connection can include:

• how close the accused was to the drugs;
• whether the drugs were in plain view;
• whether the drugs were readily accessible;
• whether the accused owned or controlled the vehicle or location;
• whether drug paraphernalia was present;
• possession of large amounts of cash;
• incriminating statements;
• flight or other alleged consciousness of guilt;
• whether additional contraband was found; and
• other circumstances suggesting knowledge and control.

No single factor automatically determines the answer. Courts consider the logical force of the evidence as a whole, and mere presence at a location where drugs are discovered is not enough by itself.

What if Drugs Are Found in a Car or House With Several People?

This is one of the most common issues in a drug-possession case.

If four people are riding in a car and drugs are discovered underneath a seat, prosecutors cannot necessarily prove that every person in the vehicle knowingly possessed those drugs simply because everyone was nearby.

The investigation may focus on who owned or drove the vehicle, where specifically the drugs were located, statements made by occupants, text messages, drug paraphernalia, cash, surveillance evidence, and other circumstances connecting a particular person to the contraband.

The same issues arise when drugs are discovered in an apartment, house, hotel room, or other location occupied by multiple people.

What Is Possession With Intent to Deliver?

Possession with intent to deliver is more serious than simple possession because prosecutors allege that the accused intended to transfer the drugs to another person.

Texas law does not necessarily require police to witness an actual sale before charging possession with intent to deliver. Prosecutors may attempt to prove intent through circumstantial evidence.
That evidence can include:

• the amount of drugs;
• how the drugs are packaged;
• scales or packaging materials;
• large amounts of cash;
• multiple cell phones;
• text messages or social-media communications;
• observed transactions; and
• other evidence suggesting distribution rather than personal use.

The defense should examine not simply whether drugs were discovered, but whether the evidence actually proves the additional allegation that the accused intended to deliver them.

How Does the Amount of Drugs Affect the Punishment?

Texas divides controlled substances into different Penalty Groups, and punishment is frequently determined by the particular substance and its aggregate weight, including adulterants and dilutants.

That means relatively small differences in alleged weight can sometimes change the felony level and significantly increase potential prison exposure.

For example, possession of many Penalty Group 1 substances can range from a state jail felony for less than one gram to increasingly serious felony punishment as the weight increases. Manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to deliver carries its own punishment structure.
Because Texas drug sentencing statutes contain numerous weight ranges, penalty groups, and enhancements, the punishment should be determined from the specific substance, weight, and charge alleged in the case.

Can a Drug Case Carry a Deadly Weapon Finding?

Yes.
One of the less obvious consequences in a Texas felony drug case is the possibility of an affirmative deadly weapon finding, particularly when police discover a firearm along with controlled substances.

But merely finding a gun in the same general location as drugs does not automatically justify a deadly-weapon finding.

Texas courts require a connection between the weapon and the felony. The weapon must in some way facilitate, enable, protect, or further the commission of the drug offense. For example, a State may argue that a firearm was possessed to protect drugs, cash, or a drug-distribution operation. Conversely, the defense may argue that a firearm happened to be present but had no connection to the alleged drug offense.

A deadly-weapon finding can have major consequences. It can make judge-ordered straight community supervision unavailable and can substantially delay parole eligibility if a prison sentence is imposed. For that reason, whether a firearm truly facilitated the drug offense can become an important issue independent of whether the State can prove possession of the drugs themselves.

Can Police Search My Phone in a Drug Investigation?

Cell phones have become increasingly important evidence in drug prosecutions.

With lawful authority, investigators may attempt to conduct a forensic examination or extraction of a phone. Depending on the device and circumstances, investigators may obtain evidence involving:

• text messages;
• photographs and videos;
• call history;
• contacts;
• social-media communications;
• messaging applications;
• location information;
• internet activity;
• financial or payment applications; and
• other stored digital information.

In a possession-with-intent or delivery case, prosecutors may attempt to use messages or other phone evidence to argue that the accused was arranging drug transactions.

But electronic evidence must still be interpreted correctly. Questions may arise about who actually used the phone or account, the context of communications, dates and timestamps, whether conversations concern the alleged offense, and whether investigators lawfully obtained the evidence.

Can Police Recover Deleted Messages or Other Phone Data?

Sometimes.

Deleting something from the screen of a phone does not necessarily mean every trace of that information has disappeared. Depending on the device, application, backups, cloud accounts, and other circumstances, forensic investigators may sometimes recover information or obtain related evidence from another source.

A person who learns that he or she is under criminal investigation should not destroy, wipe, alter, or delete potential evidence. Apart from losing information that may actually help the defense, destruction of evidence after learning of an investigation can create additional legal problems.

Can Police Use a Confidential Informant or Controlled Buy Against Me?

Yes. Some drug investigations begin through confidential informants or cooperating witnesses.
Law enforcement may use an informant to conduct an alleged controlled purchase, introduce an undercover officer, provide information supporting a search warrant, or identify people suspected of distributing drugs.

A defense attorney may examine issues such as the informant’s reliability, criminal history, motive to cooperate, benefits received from law enforcement, the procedures used during a controlled buy, audio or video evidence, surveillance, and whether the informant’s account is supported by independent evidence.

Should I Talk to Police if I Am Accused of a Drug Crime?

A person accused of a serious drug offense should be cautious about giving a statement to law enforcement without first consulting a criminal defense attorney.

Investigators may ask questions about who owns the drugs, where they came from, who else is involved, a particular phone number or text message, the purpose of cash found during a search, or the identity of other suspected participants.

Statements made in an attempt to “explain” the situation can sometimes supply prosecutors with evidence they did not previously have.
There may be situations in which speaking with law enforcement is strategically beneficial. But that decision should generally be made after understanding the evidence and potential consequences, rather than during an unexpected interrogation or roadside encounter.

Can Cooperating With Police or Prosecutors Help a Drug Case?

Sometimes—but cooperation should be approached carefully and strategically.
In serious drug investigations, law enforcement may be interested in information about people they believe occupy a larger role in drug distribution. In the right case, providing truthful and useful information may affect charging decisions or plea negotiations.

But cooperation involves significant risks.

A person may admit to criminal conduct while trying to help himself. The information provided may not ultimately be valuable enough to produce the result the accused expected. And police officers generally cannot guarantee what a prosecutor or judge will ultimately do.

For those reasons, a person considering cooperation should ordinarily do so through an experienced criminal defense attorney. Defense counsel can communicate with prosecutors or investigators beforehand, determine what the government is seeking, understand what consideration—if any—may be available, and help prevent the client from walking into an interview without understanding the consequences.

In some cases, cooperation can be an important part of the defense strategy. In others, speaking to law enforcement may be a serious mistake. The decision depends on the particular facts and evidence.

What if Police Found Drugs After a Traffic Stop or Search Warrant?

Many drug cases begin with a traffic stop or the execution of a search warrant.
The defense may examine:

• whether the officer had a lawful reason to stop the vehicle;
• whether the detention was unlawfully prolonged;
• whether consent to search was actually given and legally valid;
• whether probable cause existed;
• whether a search warrant was supported by sufficient facts;
• whether officers searched locations permitted by the warrant;
• whether statements were obtained lawfully; and
• whether evidence discovered during the search should be suppressed.

If important evidence was obtained in violation of the Constitution or Texas law, the defense may seek to prevent prosecutors from using that evidence at trial.

What Defenses Apply to Texas Drug Charges?

The available defense depends on the facts of the particular case. Common issues include:

• Lack of Possession: The State must prove a knowing connection between the accused and the controlled substance. Being near another person’s drugs is not necessarily possession.
• Lack of Knowledge: Even when drugs are physically located somewhere associated with the accused, prosecutors must prove the required mental state.
• Affirmative Links: When multiple people have access to the location where drugs are discovered, the evidence connecting the accused to the drugs may be challenged.
• Lack of Intent to Deliver: Even if possession can be established, the evidence may not prove an intent to distribute the drugs.
• Search and Seizure Violations: Drugs, firearms, phone evidence, or statements obtained through an unlawful search or seizure may sometimes be suppressed.
• Problems With Confidential Informants: Informants may have motives to provide information favorable to police, including pending criminal charges, payment, or promises of favorable treatment.
• Drug Weight or Laboratory Evidence: The identity and weight of the alleged substance must be established through admissible evidence.
• Laboratory testing and chain-of-custody issues may become important.
• Deadly Weapon Allegations: When the State seeks a deadly-weapon finding, the defense may challenge whether the weapon actually facilitated or furthered the drug offense.
• Insufficient Evidence: Prosecutors must prove every element of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt.

What Should Someone Do Immediately After Being Accused of a Drug Crime?

A person facing a serious drug investigation should avoid destroying evidence, deleting communications, wiping electronic devices, contacting witnesses in an attempt to change their testimony, or giving an unplanned statement to investigators.
Important evidence should instead be preserved.
Depending on the case, that may include:

• text messages;
• phone records;
• photographs;
• location information;
• financial records;
• surveillance video;
• vehicle information;
• communications with other people present when drugs were discovered; and
• evidence showing who actually controlled the location where the drugs were found.

Our Experience Defending Serious Drug Cases

Justin Dotzel and Luke Calhoun are former Collin County Chief Felony Prosecutors who have handled thousands of criminal cases and nearly 200 jury trials.

Dotzel Calhoun represents clients charged with serious state drug offenses involving possession, possession with intent to deliver, manufacture or delivery, firearms, search warrants, confidential informants, and other complex issues throughout Collin County, Dallas County, and North Texas.

How Can a Texas Drug Defense Attorney Help?

An experienced criminal defense attorney can:

• Investigate who actually possessed the alleged controlled substance
• Challenge whether the evidence sufficiently links the accused to the drugs
• Examine the legality of traffic stops, searches, and search warrants
• Review body-camera and surveillance footage
• Analyze phone extractions and electronic communications
• Challenge allegations of intent to deliver
• Investigate confidential informants and controlled purchases
• Review laboratory testing and alleged drug weight
• Challenge deadly-weapon allegations
• Communicate with prosecutors before indictment
• Evaluate whether cooperation with law enforcement is strategically beneficial
• Negotiate for dismissal or reduction when supported by the evidence
• Defend the accused before a jury when necessary

Contact Dotzel Calhoun

A serious Texas drug charge can expose a person to years or even decades in prison, particularly when prosecutors allege large quantities, intent to deliver, prior convictions, drug-free zones, or the use of a deadly weapon.

Dotzel Calhoun represents people accused of Possession of Controlled Substances, Possession With Intent to Deliver, Manufacture or Delivery of Controlled Substances, and other Texas drug offenses in Collin County, Dallas County, and throughout North Texas.

Contact Dotzel Calhoun at (972) 372-9383, or info@dotzelcalhoun.com for a confidential consultation and case evaluation.