In Minnesota, you don’t have to be caught with drugs in your pocket to be charged with possession. Prosecutors often rely on a concept called constructive possession, which allows them to charge someone even if the drugs were found nearby, in a car, a home, or another shared space.
This doctrine gives the state broad power, but it also leaves room for error and unfair assumptions.
At Martine Law, we’ve defended countless clients accused of possessing drugs they never actually touched. Understanding how constructive possession works—and how to challenge it—can make the difference between conviction and dismissal.
What Is Constructive Possession Under Minnesota Law?
Minnesota’s drug laws, found in Minn. Stat. §152.021–§152.025, prohibit possessing controlled substances. But “possession” doesn’t always mean having drugs physically on you.
There are two kinds of possession recognized in Minnesota:
- Actual possession: The drugs are found directly on your person (in your pocket, purse, or hand).
- Constructive possession: The drugs are not on your body, but prosecutors claim you knew about them and had control over their location.
To convict someone of constructive possession, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:
- You knew the drugs were there, and
- You had the ability to exercise dominion or control over them.
That second part—control—is often the hardest for prosecutors to prove, and it’s where many cases can be successfully defended.
How Constructive Possession Applies in Real Situations
1. Drugs Found in a Car
One of the most common scenarios is when drugs are discovered in a vehicle.
For example:
- Police find drugs in the glovebox or under a seat.
- Several people are in the car, and no one admits ownership.
- The car is borrowed or shared.
In these cases, prosecutors often argue that everyone in the car had constructive possession because they were near the drugs and could access them.
However, a defense attorney can argue that:
- The drugs were out of sight (like in a closed container).
- The car belonged to someone else.
- There is no fingerprint, DNA, or admission linking you to the drugs.
- You had no knowledge the drugs were there.
Minnesota courts have dismissed many cases where mere proximity wasn’t enough. The state must show more than that you were “near” the drugs—it must prove you had knowledge and control.
2. Drugs Found in a Home or Apartment
Constructive possession cases also arise when drugs are found in a residence, especially when multiple people live there.
For instance:
- Drugs are found in a shared living room, kitchen, or bathroom.
- A roommate keeps drugs in a common area.
- A visitor leaves contraband behind.
In these situations, prosecutors often rely on control over the premises as evidence. But if the area was shared—or if you didn’t have access to the location where the drugs were found—your attorney can challenge the claim of control.
Examples of strong defenses include:
- You were a guest, not the leaseholder.
- The drugs were found in another person’s bedroom or private belongings.
- There’s no proof you handled or used the drugs.
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that when more than one person has access to the space, the state must show a strong link between the defendant and the drugs beyond shared access alone.
3. Drugs Found in Shared or Public Spaces
Drugs found in shared or public places—like a party, workplace, or rental property—pose even more evidentiary problems. Simply being nearby is not enough for conviction.
To prove constructive possession in a shared space, prosecutors must show specific evidence that ties you to the drugs, such as:
- Statements admitting ownership or knowledge
- Personal items stored near the drugs
- Witness testimony linking you to the location
- Surveillance footage or fingerprints
Without that link, the case rests on speculation, which is not sufficient for a criminal conviction under Minnesota law.
Defending Against Constructive Possession Charges
Defending a constructive possession case requires challenging the state’s assumptions about knowledge and control. At Martine Law, we use several defense strategies, depending on the facts:
1. Lack of Knowledge
You genuinely didn’t know the drugs were there. For example, someone else placed drugs in your car or home without your awareness.
2. No Control Over the Area
You didn’t have the ability to control where the drugs were found—such as when the drugs were discovered in someone else’s car or private room.
3. Shared Access Creates Doubt
If multiple people could have possessed the drugs, there is reasonable doubt about who actually did. Minnesota courts have dismissed cases on this basis alone.
4. Illegal Search or Seizure
If police searched your car or home without a valid warrant or probable cause, your attorney can move to suppress the evidence. Evidence obtained illegally cannot be used in court.
5. Chain of Custody or Testing Issues
Even if drugs were seized, the prosecution must maintain a proper chain of custody and lab verification that the substance was illegal. Any error in handling or testing can invalidate the evidence.
Why These Cases Are So Complex
Constructive possession cases depend heavily on circumstantial evidence—the weakest type of evidence in criminal law. Prosecutors often rely on assumptions, like “you lived there” or “you were in the car,” instead of direct proof.
But Minnesota courts require something more concrete. In State v. Florine (1975), the Minnesota Supreme Court clarified that the state must show either:
- Exclusive control over the place where the drugs were found, or
- A strong probability that the defendant was consciously exercising control.
Without that proof, the case cannot stand.
How Martine Law Can Help
At Martine Law, we know that being near drugs doesn’t make you guilty of possessing them. Our attorneys will:
- Review police reports and search warrants for constitutional violations
- Investigate who actually owned or controlled the property
- Challenge weak or circumstantial evidence
- Present alternative explanations for the presence of drugs
- Work to get your charges reduced or dismissed entirely
We combine deep knowledge of Minnesota law with a client-centered approach focused on protecting your record and your future.
If you’ve been accused of drug possession in Minnesota, especially when the drugs weren’t found directly on you, contact Martine Law today for a confidential consultation. You may have stronger defenses than you think.