At The Brancato Law Firm in Tampa, we defend people facing constructive possession charges. Our founder, Rocky Brancato, has spent more than 25 years in Hillsborough County’s criminal justice system. He served as Chief Operations Officer of the Hillsborough County Public Defender’s Office, the largest criminal defense operation in Tampa Bay, so he knows how the local system handles drug cases from the defense side.

What Does the State Have to Prove in a Constructive Possession Case?

All three of the following have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If even one of them is not proven, you cannot be convicted of possession.

• You knew the drugs were there. Knowing means you were aware the drugs were in the car, room or bag.
• You could control the drugs. Control means you had the power to decide what happened to the drugs, such as keeping them, moving them or getting rid of them. The State tries to prove control by showing that you control the place where the drugs were found, such as a car you drive or a bedroom that is yours. It can also try to show that you hid the drugs there.
• The substance is the drug named in the charge. If the charge says cocaine, the State has to prove the substance was cocaine.

The State does not have to prove the drugs belonged to you. Florida defines possession by knowledge and control, so drugs owned by a friend or roommate can still be charged as yours if you knew about them and could control them. That is why saying “they weren’t mine” does not end the case by itself.

Whether anyone else used the place changes how the State proves knowledge. If you were the only person using the car or room, Florida’s jury instruction allows the jury to infer that you knew the drugs were there. If other people shared it, the jury is not allowed to make that inference, and the State has to prove your knowledge with other evidence. That evidence can be circumstantial evidence, meaning facts that point to your knowledge without directly proving it.

What Is the Difference Between Actual and Constructive Possession?

In actual possession, the drugs are on your body, so where they were found shows you possessed them. Drugs close enough for you to reach easily also count as actual possession, but only if they are under your control. The State still has to prove you knew about them. In constructive possession, the drugs are somewhere else, so the State has to prove both your knowledge and your control from the circumstances.

Constructive possession is not limited to drugs. Florida uses the same idea for other things that are illegal to possess, such as a firearm when the person charged is a convicted felon, or child sexual abuse material (CSAM) found on a shared computer. In each of these cases, the State has to show that you knew the item was there and could control it, and sharing the car, home or computer with other people makes that harder to prove.

Is Being Near Drugs Enough for a Possession Charge?

No, when the drugs are in a place someone else controls, being close to them does not prove you possessed them. Florida’s jury instruction tells jurors that closeness alone does not show control in that situation. For example, if you were visiting a friend’s apartment and police found drugs in your friend’s kitchen cabinet, being in the apartment would not prove you possessed those drugs. The State would need evidence that ties you to them.

What If the Drugs Were Found in a Shared Car or Home?

A place counts as shared when more than one person uses it. That includes the rooms everyone uses in a home you rent with a roommate, such as the kitchen and living room. It also includes your own car when other people are riding in it. Sharing a place does not clear you. Florida’s jury instruction says two or more people can possess the same drugs at the same time. This is called joint possession, and each of those people is considered to be in possession.

Sharing does change the evidence the State needs. In Brown v. State, the Florida Supreme Court held in 1983 that when a place is shared, both your knowledge of the drugs and your ability to control them “must be established by independent proof.” Independent proof means evidence other than your connection to the place, such as something you said or your fingerprints.

Brown also made one exception to the independent proof rule, for drugs in plain view. Plain view means the drugs were out in the open where anyone could see them. When drugs are in plain view in a shared place, and an owner or occupant of that place is present, the court held that those facts are enough to support that person’s conviction for constructive possession. An occupant is someone who lives in the place or shares control of it, such as a roommate who rents the apartment but does not own it.

A passenger riding in someone else’s car and a guest visiting someone else’s home do not count as occupants under this rule. For them, drugs in plain view are not automatically enough for a conviction, and the State needs other evidence that ties them to the drugs. Two decisions from Florida’s Second District Court of Appeal show what happens when the State has no other evidence against a visitor or a passenger. That court hears appeals from Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco counties, so its decisions apply to cases there.

• In Sundin v. State, the court reversed the conviction of a man visiting a hotel room he had not rented, even though the drugs were within his reach.
• In Wynn v. State, the court reversed a passenger’s conviction for cocaine found in the driver’s-side door handle. The cocaine was not in plain view, and the State had no evidence connecting the passenger to it.

Can You Give Me an Example of Constructive Possession?

These four hypothetical situations show which facts tend to help the State and which tend to help the defense:

• Your own car, driving alone. Police find pills in the glove box of a car you own and no one else drives. Because you alone control the car, the jury may infer you knew about the pills. These facts favor the State.
• Your own car, with a friend riding along. Police find the same pills in the closed glove box while your friend sits in the passenger seat. The car is shared, so the jury cannot infer that you knew about the pills. Unless the State has other evidence tying you to them, these facts favor the defense.
• A friend’s car, with drugs in plain sight. You are a passenger, and a bag of powder is sitting on the center console. As a passenger, you are not an occupant under the plain view rule, so the bag being visible is not automatically enough for a conviction. Without other evidence tying you to the bag, these facts favor the defense.
• A shared apartment, with drugs on the coffee table. You rent an apartment with a roommate, and police find cocaine on the living room coffee table while you are home. You are an occupant, and the drugs were in plain view. These facts favor the State.

What Evidence Do Prosecutors Use to Prove Constructive Possession?

Florida courts have accepted these kinds of evidence as proof that ties a specific person to drugs found in a shared space:

• Your own statements. Telling police the drugs are yours, that you bought them, or that you use drugs can connect you to the drugs.
• Items found with the drugs that match what you told police. In Thompson v. State, a man told police he had bought methamphetamine and described how he used drugs. A straw found with the drugs fit that description, and the court held that his statements and the straw together were enough to tie him to the drugs.
• Fingerprints or DNA. Physical evidence can tie you to the drugs themselves.

Is Constructive Possession Punished Less Than Actual Possession?

For drug charges, the penalties are the same, because Florida’s drug law treats actual and constructive possession as one offense. The penalty depends on the drug and the amount. Possessing a controlled substance is generally a third-degree felony, which carries up to five years in prison. Possessing 20 grams or less of marijuana is a first-degree misdemeanor, which carries a sentence of up to one year. Larger amounts of a drug can lead to a separate charge of drug trafficking. Our Tampa drug crimes defense page explains how the penalties change for other drugs and amounts.

That is not true of every possession charge. A convicted felon can be found guilty of possessing a firearm under section 790.23 of the Florida Statutes through either actual or constructive possession. But the three-year minimum mandatory prison sentence in section 775.087(2)(a)1 applies only when the felon actually possessed the firearm. If the State can prove only constructive possession, such as a gun found in a bedroom closet, that minimum mandatory does not apply.

How Do You Fight a Constructive Possession Charge?

These are the main defenses:

• You did not know the drugs were there. If someone else left the drugs in a car or room you use and you never knew about them, the State cannot prove you knew.
• The drugs were in a place someone else controlled. Drugs in another person’s bedroom, purse or backpack are in a place that person controls, and being near them does not prove you controlled them.
• Nothing ties you to drugs in a shared space. Without evidence such as your statements or your fingerprints, sharing the car or home where the drugs were found is not enough to prove you possessed them.
• You did not know the substance was an illegal drug. This defense applies when you knew the substance was there but did not know it was an illegal drug.
• The search was illegal. If police searched the car, home or bag without a legal basis, a motion to suppress can keep the State from using the drugs as evidence against you. If the drugs are kept out, the State may not have enough evidence left to continue the case.
• The evidence is too weak to go to trial. When the State’s evidence cannot show knowledge or control, a motion to dismiss asks the court to end the case before trial.

The defense of not knowing a substance was illegal comes from section 893.101 of the Florida Statutes. For example, it would apply if you knew a pill bottle was in your car but believed it held a legal medication. The State does not have to prove you knew a substance was illegal. Instead, your lack of knowledge is an affirmative defense, meaning a defense you raise yourself. It gives the jury a reason not to convict you even if the State proves the things it has to prove.

If you raise this defense, the jury is told that the law allows jurors to presume that a person who possessed a controlled substance knew the substance was illegal. The jury does not have to accept that presumption. If it believes you did not know the substance was illegal, it can find you not guilty. The defense does not help if your position is that you never knew the drugs were there, because that is a different question the State has to prove.

When a case involves a search, it helps to know how police are trained to conduct one. Our founder, Rocky Brancato, taught criminal procedure to officers as a police academy instructor. Our team uses that knowledge to compare what the officers in your case did with what they were taught to do. When the officers did not follow their training, we use that to challenge their testimony about the search.

In Florida, prosecutors decide after an arrest whether to file formal charges. The defense can present its arguments to prosecutors before they make that decision. When drugs are found in a shared car or shared luggage, we challenge whether the State can prove constructive possession. Luggage on a trip is a common example. When several people packed, carried or had access to the same suitcase, the State has to show which of them knew about the drugs and could control them. If the evidence cannot answer that, it is an argument we can raise with prosecutors before charges are filed.

Knowledge matters even when the drugs are found on your body. In a trial we describe in our case study It’s the Client’s Call, a client was charged after hospital staff found cocaine in his pants pocket while he was being treated for a medical emergency. No witness ever saw him conscious and in control of the drugs, and the jury found him not guilty. Each case is unique. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

Frequently Asked Questions About Constructive Possession in Florida

Should I talk to police about drugs found near me?

Talk to a criminal defense attorney before you say anything more to police about the drugs. In a shared car or home, your own words can be the evidence that ties you to drugs the State otherwise could not connect to you. Even saying “those belong to my roommate” can help the State, because it shows you knew the drugs were there.

Can I be convicted for drugs found in my roommate’s bedroom?

If you do not use your roommate’s bedroom, it is a place your roommate controls. Living in the same apartment does not prove you possessed drugs kept there. The State would need evidence tying you to those specific drugs, such as your fingerprints or something you said about them.

Does the State need fingerprints or DNA to prove constructive possession?

No, Florida does not require fingerprints or DNA to prove constructive possession. Other evidence, such as your own statements, can connect you to the drugs instead. The State still needs some evidence beyond the fact that you were near the drugs. In one Florida appeals case, two people could reach the drugs equally, and the State offered no fingerprints, DNA or other evidence tying the accused to them. The court reversed the conviction.

Talk to Us About a Constructive Possession Charge

A possession charge for drugs that were not on you is frightening, especially before you know what evidence the State has. If you or someone close to you has been charged with possession for drugs found in a car, home or bag, we can review the evidence the State has connecting you to those drugs and explain what it means for your case. Call The Brancato Law Firm at (813) 727-7159 for a free, confidential consultation. We are available 24/7 when someone has just been arrested. Our office is at 620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, in downtown Tampa.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

In a thrown-drugs case, the suppression hearing usually comes down to a few seconds of video: did the person stop before the object left his hand, or after? I’m Rocky Brancato, and before founding The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm, I taught officers the legal limits of arrest authority as a police academy instructor. I have since tried more than 150 jury trials to verdict. Our attorneys build every abandonment challenge around that sequence, matching the officer’s report against body camera footage frame by frame.

What Does “Abandonment” Mean When Police Find Drugs You Threw?

Abandonment means you gave up your privacy interest in an item by throwing it, dropping it, or leaving it behind, so police can pick it up and use it without a warrant. Florida courts apply one critical limit: the abandonment must be voluntary. An item you discard because police illegally seized you is treated as the product of that illegal seizure, and it can be suppressed.

The Florida Supreme Court drew this line in Hollinger v. State, 620 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 1993). The court explained that a person who flees from a show of police authority has not been seized, while a person who stays in place and submits has been seized. If a person submits to an illegal stop and then drops contraband, the evidence must be suppressed. The court added that police do not have to order a person to drop anything for the abandonment to be involuntary.

This matters most in drug possession cases, which our Tampa drug crimes attorney page covers in more detail, because a tossed baggie or pill bottle is often the only evidence the State has.

What Is the Difference Between “Drop Then Stop” and “Stop Then Drop”?

“Drop then stop” means you got rid of the item before you were seized, so it is voluntarily abandoned and admissible. “Stop then drop” means you had already submitted to police authority when you got rid of it, so the abandonment is involuntary if the stop was illegal. The legality of the officer’s order does not matter in a “drop then stop” case.

The U.S. Supreme Court set the federal rule in California v. Hodari D., 499 U.S. 621 (1991). Hodari ran when he saw officers, and he tossed a rock of crack cocaine just before an officer tackled him. The State conceded the officer had no reasonable suspicion to stop him. The Court still held the cocaine admissible because a person is seized only by physical force or by submitting to a show of authority, and Hodari had done neither when he threw it.

Florida’s Fourth District applied that rule in Johnson v. State, 640 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). An officer told Johnson to stop. Johnson kept walking briskly, stepped onto a porch, threw something down, and only then turned toward the officer and said, “What, officer?” The State conceded the officers had no lawful reason to stop him. The court called it a very close case, but it upheld the trial judge’s finding that the drop came before the stop, so the evidence came in.

When Are You “Seized” by Police in Florida?

You are seized when an officer physically restrains you or when you submit to an officer’s show of authority, such as an order to stop. Submission does not require handcuffs or even a spoken command. Courts look at what you actually did in the seconds before the item left your hand.

Hollinger shows how little it can take. Masked Orange County deputies in SWAT-style gear pulled into a parking lot during a drug sweep, announced “Orange County Sheriff’s Office,” and approached a group. Hollinger put his hand behind his back and dropped a tissue holding six rocks of cocaine. No deputy told him to freeze. The trial judge found that a reasonable person would have felt he was not to move, and the Florida Supreme Court upheld the suppression.

In Lang v. State, 671 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), a deputy stopped Lang, who was walking at night with a flashlight in a high-crime area, without any reasonable basis. The deputy told Lang to step back to the patrol car, and Lang began to comply. When the deputy told him to take his hand out of his pocket, Lang threw a pill bottle behind him. The Fifth District held that Lang had submitted by starting to comply, so the abandonment was involuntary, and it reversed his conviction.

Compare State v. Canada, 715 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). Officers asked Canada what was in his hand. Instead of showing them, he turned, threw a film container about 25 feet over a chain-link fence, and tried to run. Because Canada never yielded, the Fifth District held the abandonment voluntary and reversed the trial court’s suppression order.

When our attorneys evaluate a thrown-evidence case, we ask five questions:

1. Did an officer give an order or make a show of authority, such as lights, commands, or blocking your path?
2. Did you stop, turn toward the officer, raise your hands, or begin following an instruction?
3. Did the item leave your hand before or after that act of compliance?
4. Did you try to run after throwing it?
5. What does the video show, compared with what the arrest report says?

What Did the Fifth District Decide in Jeffries v. State (2026)?

The Fifth District held that a man who stopped and turned toward an officer before throwing a pill bottle had already submitted, so the abandonment was involuntary. The case is Jeffries v. State, No. 5D2024-1721 (Fla. 5th DCA July 31, 2026), and it is the newest Florida appellate decision applying the stop-then-drop rule.

Larry Sapp, an off-duty Clay County School District police officer, was home in Putnam County, outside his jurisdiction, when his daughter told him someone had tried to break into his patrol car. Sapp saw Jeffries leaving his property, identified himself as law enforcement, and ordered him to stop. Jeffries kept walking. Sapp later found him near an apartment complex and again ordered him to stop. This time Jeffries stopped and turned toward Sapp. As Sapp moved in to arrest him, Jeffries made a throwing motion. A responding officer found a pill bottle containing narcotics where the object landed, and a search of Jeffries turned up a stun gun.

The court applied Hollinger, Hodari D., and Johnson. It found that Jeffries had already complied with the second order to stop when he threw the bottle, which made the facts line up with Lang rather than Canada. The court noted that Jeffries had walked away the first time but stopped the second time, and the second stop is what mattered. Because the abandonment was involuntary, the pill bottle could not justify the search that found the stun gun as a lawful search incident to arrest.

The court reversed the order denying suppression, vacated Jeffries’s conviction for possession of an electric weapon or device by a convicted felon under section 790.23, Florida Statutes, and remanded. At the hearing, defense counsel had limited the motion to suppress to the stun gun count, so the opinion does not decide what happens to the drug possession counts.

Jeffries also held that the arrest itself was unlawful. An officer outside his jurisdiction has only a private citizen’s arrest powers, which reach only a felony or a breach of the peace committed in the citizen’s presence, and the court found Sapp saw neither. We cover that part of the case in our posts on disorderly conduct and breach of the peace and on whether an off-duty police officer can arrest you in Florida.

The evergreen lesson from Jeffries is simple. Stopping and turning toward an officer is submission, and anything thrown after that moment is suppressible if the stop or arrest was illegal.

Why Does the Legality of the Stop Decide Everything?

The legality of the stop decides the case because a stop-then-drop argument wins only when the seizure was illegal. If the officer had reasonable suspicion to detain you, the evidence comes in even though you had submitted before you threw it. Every abandonment motion therefore has two parts: when you were seized, and whether the officer had a lawful basis to seize you at that moment.

Under the Florida Stop and Frisk Law, section 901.151, Florida Statutes, an officer may temporarily detain a person only when the circumstances reasonably indicate the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. The statute also bars evidence from a search under that section unless the search complied with the statute. Our post on whether police can stop and frisk you in Florida walks through what counts as reasonable suspicion.

A recent First District case shows why the defense must attack the stop directly. In Smith v. State, No. 1D2025-0497 (Fla. 1st DCA Sept. 23, 2026), Smith tried to keep officers from seeing a cellophane baggie in his hand, including by stomping on it after he dropped it, and the court counted those efforts among the facts supporting probable cause to search his vehicle. Smith also challenged his initial detention, but his brief argued only probable cause and never addressed reasonable suspicion, so the court held he had not shown the detention was unlawful and affirmed. The Second District, which hears appeals from Tampa Bay, treats cannabis odor differently than the First District did in Smith, as we explain in our post on whether police can search your car for smelling weed in Florida.

Can Throwing Drugs Add a Tampering With Evidence Charge?

Yes, throwing drugs can lead to a tampering charge, but tossing them in plain view does not automatically qualify. Under section 918.13, Florida Statutes, the State must prove you knew an investigation was pending or about to begin and that you altered, destroyed, concealed, or removed an item with the purpose of impairing its availability. Tampering is a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison.

In State v. Jennings, 666 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1995), Jennings swallowed suspected cocaine rocks the moment an officer shouted “police!” The Florida Supreme Court held that swallowing an item can be tampering, and that throwing evidence away in an officer’s presence may also be tampering depending on the circumstances.

The Second District, whose decisions bind Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco courts, applied that rule in E.I. v. State, 25 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). During a traffic stop in Plant City, a passenger tossed a package of methamphetamine out the truck window at the driver’s direction, and it landed in plain view on a gas station parking lot. The court held this was abandonment, not attempted tampering, because nothing showed he intended to alter, destroy, or conceal the package, and it ordered him discharged. The court pointed to swallowing drugs or dropping them into a drainage outlet as the kind of acts aimed at destroying evidence.

Abandonment doctrine works at two stages of the same case. At the suppression hearing, the question is whether the toss was voluntary. At trial on a tampering count, the question is whether the toss was a plain abandonment or an act meant to destroy or hide the evidence. Losing the first argument does not end the second.

Is Running From Police a Separate Crime in Florida?

Running from police can be charged as resisting an officer without violence, a first-degree misdemeanor under section 843.02, Florida Statutes, punishable by up to one year in jail. The charge requires that the officer was lawfully executing a legal duty when you ran.

In C.E.L. v. State, 24 So. 3d 1181 (Fla. 2009), a juvenile ran when he saw deputies at an apartment complex known for drug activity, then kept running after they ordered him to stop. The Florida Supreme Court held that his unprovoked flight in a high-crime area gave the deputies reasonable suspicion, so his continued flight in defiance of their order was resisting without violence. The court also held that the person must know the officer intends to detain him, and the officer must be justified in making the stop when the resistance occurs.

Running rarely helps. Anything you throw while running is admissible under Hodari D., and if the officer had a lawful basis to stop you, the flight adds a separate charge. In Tampa Bay arrest paperwork, our attorneys routinely see a resisting count stacked on top of the charge that started the encounter, and in our Hillsborough County practice it is often the most winnable charge on the arrest affidavit. Our post on resisting an officer without violence in Florida explains those defenses.

What Charges Can Follow When Police Recover Thrown Evidence?

A thrown item usually produces a possession charge, and the throw itself can add tampering or resisting counts. Drug charges are a steady share of local arrests: in 2020, law enforcement in Hillsborough County reported 3,028 drug arrests out of 32,519 total arrests, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s 2020 county arrest data, the last year FDLE published county arrest totals in that format. That is about one of every eleven arrests in the county.

How Do Our Attorneys Challenge Thrown Evidence?

Our attorneys challenge thrown evidence by rebuilding the encounter second by second and filing a motion to suppress when the timeline shows a stop-then-drop on an illegal stop. The motion asks the judge to exclude the item and anything found because of it, as happened with the stun gun in Jeffries.

1. Pin down the sequence. We compare body camera and dash camera footage, dispatch audio, and the arrest report to fix the exact moment of the order, the moment of compliance, and the moment of the throw.
2. Test the basis for the stop. We identify what the officer knew before giving the order and whether it amounted to reasonable suspicion under section 901.151.
3. Challenge the officer’s account. Legal scholars have flagged “dropsy” testimony for decades. Law professor Christopher Slobogin, in Testilying: Police Perjury and What to Do About It, 67 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1037 (1996), describes data showing that police testimony that arrestees dropped drugs as officers approached increased after Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court decision that applied the exclusionary rule to state police. Video now lets us test that kind of claim.
4. Follow the fruit. If the throw was involuntary, we move to suppress everything that flowed from it, including later searches of your person or car.
5. Defend the add-on counts. We attack tampering and resisting charges on their own elements, even if the suppression motion fails.

Our post on motions to suppress evidence in Tampa explains how these hearings work.

What Should You Do After an Arrest Involving Thrown Drugs?

Talk to a defense attorney before you talk to anyone else about the case, and do it quickly, because the evidence that proves the sequence can disappear. Private surveillance systems often record over old footage, and witnesses forget details.

• Do not explain to police, cellmates, or friends why you threw something. Those statements can be used against you.
• Write down, privately, the order of events: when the officer spoke, when you stopped, and when the item left your hand.
• Note any businesses, homes, or vehicles nearby that may have cameras, and anyone who saw the encounter.
• Do not post about the arrest on social media.
• If officers released you and said the item would be tested, charges can still be filed later. Our representation before charges are filed can begin now.

Frequently Asked Questions About Thrown Evidence in Florida

Can police use drugs I threw while running away from them?

Usually yes, because a person who is running has not been seized, so anything thrown during the chase is treated as voluntarily abandoned under Hodari D. and Canada. The Brancato Law Firm still examines whether you actually stopped, even briefly, before the throw, since that moment can change the outcome. Our stop and frisk guide explains when police can lawfully chase and detain you.

Is it tampering with evidence to throw drugs on the ground in front of an officer?

Not automatically, because Florida requires proof that you intended to destroy, conceal, or remove the item, and a toss in plain view that police easily recover can be plain abandonment under E.I. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm attack the intent element directly and use the recovery location and video to show nothing was hidden. Swallowing drugs or dropping them down a drain is treated more seriously under section 918.13.

Can thrown drug charges be dropped in Florida?

Yes, thrown drug charges can be dropped, most often when a judge suppresses the item and the State has no other evidence to prove possession. The Brancato Law Firm also evaluates diversion options, and Hillsborough County offers programs such as Pretrial Intervention and Drug Court that can result in dismissal. See our page on drug possession defense in Tampa for more.

What if I threw a gun when police approached me in Florida?

The same abandonment rules apply to a gun as to drugs, so a gun thrown before you were seized is admissible, while a gun thrown after you submitted to an illegal stop can be suppressed. For clients with a prior felony, The Brancato Law Firm treats the suppression issue as the center of the defense, because possession by a convicted felon under section 790.23 is a second-degree felony. Our Tampa gun crimes lawyer page explains those charges.

What if police let me go after I threw something and said they would test it?

You can still be charged later, because the State can file charges after lab results come back. The Brancato Law Firm can contact the prosecutor before a decision is made and preserve video while it still exists. Learn more about our pre-file advocacy work.

Does it matter if the officer was off duty or outside his jurisdiction?

Yes, because an officer outside his jurisdiction generally has only a private citizen’s arrest powers, and Jeffries shows an arrest outside those limits is unlawful. Our attorneys at The Brancato Law Firm check where the officer was, whether he was on duty, and what he personally saw before the arrest. Read more in our post on whether an off-duty police officer can arrest you in Florida.

What if the police report says I dropped the drugs before I stopped?

The report is not the final word, because the judge decides the sequence at the suppression hearing from all the evidence, including video and your testimony. The Brancato Law Firm lines up the report against the footage and dispatch timeline to find gaps. Johnson shows how close these calls can be.

Thrown Evidence Cases Are Won on the Timeline

The first thing our attorneys do in a thrown-evidence case is lock down the timeline: the video, the dispatch audio, and the officer’s report, compared second by second before footage is lost or memories fade. The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. was founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato, and our attorneys defend drug, gun, and resisting charges in Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties. Call (813) 727-7159 now, while the evidence that shows when you stopped still exists. For more about our defense strategies, visit our Drug Crimes page.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

I’m Rocky Brancato, founder of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., a Tampa criminal defense firm. Our attorneys defend drug cases across Tampa Bay from the pre-file stage forward — engaging the State Attorney’s Office before charges are finalized — and the first documents we audit in every case are the lab report and the charging document, side by side. As two Florida appellate decisions this year show, when those documents don’t match, convictions come apart.

Does the State Have to Prove the Exact Drug It Charged?

Yes — and if it proves a different one, you are entitled to an acquittal, not a do-over. In Quinones Santiago v. State, No. 6D2024-1003 (Fla. 6th DCA July 24, 2026), the State charged a man with trafficking in fentanyl, identified in the charging document by fentanyl’s specific statutory listing. At trial, the State’s own evidence showed the substance in the pill bottle was actually para-fluorofentanyl — a fentanyl derivative with an extra fluorine atom, listed in a different schedule under a different statutory subsection. The State argued the difference was “a distinction without a difference.” The Sixth District disagreed: “the statutes tell a different story,” and under long-standing Florida law, where an offense can be committed in various ways, the evidence must establish it was committed in the manner charged. Because the State charged one substance and proved another, it failed to prove its case — the court reversed and remanded for a judgment of acquittal.

The court even added a pointed admonishment: problems like this “should be avoided by the State taking a moment to double-check its charging documents.” That double-check is exactly what our attorneys do from the defense side, because prosecutors filing hundreds of cases do not always match the lab chemistry to the statutory subsection — and the mismatch is a complete defense that must be raised the right way, at the right moment, to end the case rather than merely delay it.

Why Does the Exact Substance Matter So Much?

Because Florida’s drug statutes treat chemically similar substances as legally different crimes, with different schedules and different consequences. The controlled-substance schedules live in Fla. Stat. § 893.03, and the trafficking statute, Fla. Stat. § 893.135, then attaches weight thresholds and mandatory minimum sentences to specific listed substances — in the disjunctive, as alternative ways of committing the crime.

Two lessons follow. First, the chemistry is a moving target — clandestine labs constantly tweak molecules, and the Legislature responds with derivative and analog listings — so whether a specific molecule actually falls within the charged listing is a genuinely litigable question that requires reading lab data against statutory text. Second, the label on the charge controls the trial: the State cannot charge one listing and convict on another, which is why the defense audit starts with the information itself.

Can You Be Convicted Twice for the Same Drugs?

No — and in May 2026 a Florida appellate court threw out three duplicate convictions in a single case to prove it. In Medders v. State, No. 4D2025-0875 (Fla. 4th DCA May 27, 2026), the defendant was convicted of both simple possession and possession with intent to sell the same drugs, plus two identically worded trafficking counts. The Fourth District reversed the duplicates. Simple possession “is subsumed by” possession with intent — every element of the lesser crime sits inside the greater one, so under the double jeopardy test codified at Fla. Stat. § 775.021(4), only one conviction can stand. And the two trafficking counts collapsed into one for a subtler reason: the statute’s opioid-trafficking provision defines a single crime of “trafficking in illegal drugs” measured by the aggregate weight of “any” of the listed substances — so possessing two different listed opioids is one trafficking offense, not two.

Two practical notes from Medders. The double jeopardy question is answered from the charging document alone — not from what the evidence later showed — which means a sharp reading of the information can identify doomed counts before trial ever starts. And these errors are correctable even after conviction, because a true double jeopardy violation is fundamental. In a system where every added count raises the scoresheet, the plea leverage, and the sentence exposure, deleting duplicate counts is not housekeeping — it changes outcomes.

Does the “Wrong Drug” Defense Always Work?

No — and an honest read of 2026’s cases shows the line. Ten days before Quinones Santiago, the same appellate court ruled for the State in State v. Smith, No. 6D2024-0495 (Fla. 6th DCA July 10, 2026), a case about cyputylone — a designer stimulant in the “bath salts” family that is not listed anywhere in the schedules by name. The trial court had dismissed the charges for exactly that reason. The Sixth District reversed: Florida’s substituted-cathinone listing works by chemical structure, not by name, covering any compound containing the defined core structure “whether or not” further modified — language the court read as “regardless of whether.” Because cyputylone contains that core structure, it is a controlled substance even though no statute spells out its name.

Put Smith and Quinones Santiago side by side and the real rule emerges. The State gets the benefit of broad, structure-based schedule definitions — a novel molecule cannot dodge the statute with a cosmetic modification. But the State is held strictly to its own paperwork: whatever listing it charges is the listing it must prove. The defense in a designer-drug case is therefore rarely “this substance isn’t illegal” and usually “the State charged the wrong listing, proved the wrong substance, or can’t establish the chemistry beyond a reasonable doubt.” That is a technical fight, fought with chemists and statutes — which is precisely why who reads the lab file matters.

How Do Defense Lawyers Attack the Substance Element?

By treating the State’s chemistry as a claim to be tested, not a fact to be accepted. In Tampa Bay drug cases, our attorneys work through a fixed sequence: obtain the full lab file (not just the one-page report) — the instrument data, the analyst’s notes, the testing method; compare the identified molecule against the exact statutory listing charged in the information, the way Quinones Santiago requires; scrutinize chain of custody from roadside seizure through the FDLE or private lab; and where the stakes justify it, retest the substance with an independent laboratory through our forensic expert network. The same audit covers the counts themselves: possession counts that duplicate intent-to-sell counts, multiple trafficking counts built on one group of substances, and weights that only cross a mandatory-minimum threshold when separate items are improperly combined. Every one of those issues is strongest when raised early — some belong in pre-file discussions with the State Attorney’s Office, some in motions, and some (like the Quinones Santiago mismatch) at the judgment-of-acquittal stage in trial. For the trafficking-specific playbook, including mandatory minimums and threshold weights, see our guide to defending a fentanyl trafficking charge in Florida.

What Should You Do After a Drug Arrest in Tampa Bay?

Say nothing about what the substance “is” — you may know less than you think, and so may the field test. Roadside presumptive tests are notoriously unreliable, deputies routinely charge based on them, and the formal lab report often arrives after the State’s filing decision. That window between arrest and filing is where our attorneys do some of their most valuable work: putting testing problems, search issues from the traffic stop or cannabis-odor search, and charging-document defects in front of the prosecutor before the information is filed. In Hillsborough County that decision typically comes within weeks, through the State Attorney’s Office at the 13th Judicial Circuit. If you were just arrested, our step-by-step guide to what to do after being arrested in Tampa covers the first 72 hours.

For more about our defense strategies, visit our Hillsborough County criminal defense page.

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if the lab report shows a different drug than I was charged with?

That mismatch is a defense — potentially a complete one. Under Quinones Santiago v. State (Fla. 6th DCA 2026), the State must prove the substance identified in the charging document; proving a chemically and legally different substance entitles the defendant to a judgment of acquittal. Our attorneys compare the lab file to the information in every drug case for exactly this reason.

Can the State just fix the charge if it named the wrong drug?

Often it can amend before trial — which is why the timing of raising the issue is strategic, and why defense counsel may litigate it at the judgment-of-acquittal stage rather than handing the State an early warning. How and when to raise a substance mismatch is a judgment call The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. makes case by case, based on the discovery timeline and the State’s proof.

Is para-fluorofentanyl the same as fentanyl under Florida law?

No. Fentanyl is a Schedule II substance with its own statutory listing; para-fluorofentanyl is a Schedule I “fentanyl derivative” under a different subsection — chemically similar, legally distinct. As the Sixth District put it, “the statutes tell a different story,” and the difference decided Quinones Santiago.

Can I be convicted of both possession and possession with intent to sell?

Not for the same drugs. Simple possession is subsumed within possession with intent to sell, so double jeopardy — codified in Fla. Stat. § 775.021(4) — allows only one conviction, as Medders v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026) reaffirmed. If both convictions appear on a judgment, the duplicate can be struck, even after the fact.

Can I get two trafficking charges for two different drugs?

It depends on which listings are involved. For the opioid group in § 893.135(1)(c)1. — morphine, opium, hydromorphone and related substances — Medders holds there is one crime of “trafficking in illegal drugs” measured by aggregate weight, not a separate count per substance. Different drug families under different subsections can still be charged separately. We chart every count against the statute in trafficking cases because the count structure drives the mandatory minimums.

Do drug charges in Florida carry mandatory minimum sentences?

Trafficking charges under § 893.135 do — tied to substance and weight thresholds — which is why the exact substance and the exact weight are both worth fighting over. A successful challenge to the substance identification, the aggregation of weights, or the count structure can move a case out of mandatory-minimum territory entirely. The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. builds drug defenses around those pressure points.

Quinones Santiago and Medders are 2026’s reminders that drug cases are won on precision — the right molecule, the right statute, the right number of counts. If you or someone you love is facing a drug charge anywhere in Tampa Bay, call the attorneys of The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. — founded by Tampa Criminal Defense Attorney Rocky Brancato — at (813) 727-7159 before the State’s filing decision is made. The lab file and the charging document are already being written; someone should be auditing them for you.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A.
620 E. Twiggs Street, Suite 205, Tampa, FL 33602
(813) 727-7159
Serving Hillsborough, Pinellas, and Pasco Counties

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. is a Tampa-based criminal defense practice. We are not affiliated with any other Brancato-named law firms.

A simple mistake regarding marijuana THC possession can have serious consequences in Florida. Many people believe marijuana is decriminalized. However, the law treats different forms of cannabis drastically differently. Understanding these distinctions is crucial. They can mean the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony, especially for concentrated THC in products like oils, waxes, and edibles.

The Brancato Law Firm, P.A. defends clients facing marijuana-related charges in Tampa, Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas counties.

What Exactly is Marijuana THC Possession Under Florida Law?

Florida law creates a critical divide between cannabis flower and THC concentrates. This distinction carries significant legal weight.

• Cannabis Flower (Bud): Possessing less than 20 grams of marijuana flower is generally a first-degree misdemeanor. A conviction can result in up to one year in jail and a $1,000 fine.
• THC Concentrates (Oil, Wax, Shatter, Edibles): Florida classifies any amount of THC in a concentrated form as a Schedule I controlled substance under § 893.03(1)(c)(190). The law treats this as a third-degree felony under § 893.13(6)(a) of the Florida Statutes.

This means that possessing even a small amount of THC in a vape cartridge or a single gummy could lead to a felony charge. A conviction is punishable by up to five years in prison.

Why Does the Form of THC Matter So Much?

The key legal issue is how Florida law treats delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) after someone extracts and concentrates it from the plant. This creates a dangerous legal situation for many people. This includes young people, college students, and first-time offenders who may not realize they are committing a felony. Even if you legally purchased THC products in another state, you can face severe penalties for possessing them in Florida.

How We Defend Against Marijuana Charges

With over 25 years of experience and more than 100 jury trials, Attorney Rocky Brancato has the knowledge and skill to effectively fight your marijuana THC possession charge. Our defense strategies include:

• Scrutinizing the Search and Seizure: Many THC-related arrests start with a questionable traffic stop or an illegal search. We will meticulously examine the details of your case to ensure police did not violate your constitutional rights.
• Challenging the Substance Identification: The prosecution must prove the substance is illegal THC. They must show it is not a legal substance like CBD or hemp-derived cannabinoids, which federal law protects. We will challenge the lab results and the chain of custody.
• Arguing for Pre-Trial Diversion or Dismissal: We can often negotiate for first-time offenders to enter a pre-trial diversion program. This can lead to the court dismissing the charges. In some cases, we can argue for an outright dismissal based on weaknesses in the prosecution’s case.
• Filing Motions to Suppress or Reduce Charges: We will file motions to suppress any evidence that police obtained illegally. We can also work to reduce a felony THC charge to a misdemeanor cannabis charge, or even get the court to throw out the case entirely.

Don’t Let a Marijuana THC Possession Charge Define Your Future

An arrest for marijuana THC possession can have a lasting impact on your life. At The Brancato Law Firm, P.A., we understand the stakes. We dedicate ourselves to navigating the complexities of the local courts. We will build a strong defense that protects not just your case, but your future.

If you have been arrested for marijuana THC possession, it is crucial to seek experienced legal representation immediately. Call us today at (813) 727-7159 or visit brancatolawfirm.com to schedule a confidential consultation.