Drug Arrests and Drug Charges

Robert J. Callahan Attorney
Specializes in Defense of Drug Charges

Mr. Moore was charged with Possession of a Controlled Substance (Class 1 Felony) (cocaine). The arresting officer testified that he had received complaints of a drug dealer matching Mr. Moore’s description in the area. The officer testified that he approached Mr. Moore for a field interview at which point Mr. Moore threw to the ground a plastic bag containing 3 grams of cocaine. The arresting officer’s story was a total fabrication.

During cross-examination, the officer admitted that he did not see Mr. Moore doing anything illegal. His story also made no sense, and had numerous factual inconsistencies.The judge found there was no probable cause and dismissed the case outright.

Drug Charges – (Manufacture/Delivery of a Controlled Substance) (Class X)

This is a case where investigation made the difference between a guilty verdict and a finding of Not Guilty. The Chicago police had charged Mr. Johns with engaging in numerous drug sales. They testified that they had set up a surveillance of a drug spot and that Mr. Johns had delivered drugs to numerous individuals during their surveillance. The officers testified during the preliminary hearing that Mr. Johns had retrieved narcotics from an exterior building light at a certain address. The police reports also stated that he had retrieved narcotics from that light.

Attorney Callahan went to the crime scene with his investigator and took several measurements and photographs. It turned out that the light on the building had no area where narcotics could have been concealed. At trial, Attorney Callahan confronted the police officers with the photographs of the scene, and challenged the common sense of their story. Also, through investigation a witness was located who had observed the police activity on that day. The witness gave a statement and later testified that the police had fabricated a great deal of what they said happened on that day. At trial the Judge found that there was a Reasonable Doubt and found Mr. Johns NOT GUILTY.