This page has been written, edited, and reviewed by a team of legal writers following our comprehensive editorial guidelines. This page was approved by Founder, Daniel Perlman who has years of legal experience as a Federal Crimes attorney. Our last modified date shows when this page was last updated & reviewed.
Facing federal drug conspiracy charges in Denver can be daunting, but understanding the laws and the defenses available can help you mount a strong defense. At Perlman Defense Federal Criminal Lawyers, we are committed to providing experienced legal representation to individuals accused of federal drug crimes. Next, we’ll explain federal drug conspiracy laws, common defenses to these charges, and case studies where conspiracy charges were successfully challenged.
Federal drug conspiracy charges arise when two or more individuals agree to engage in illegal drug trafficking or distribution activities. Under 21 U.S.C. § 846, it is illegal to conspire to violate any of the provisions of federal drug laws. A conspiracy charge doesn’t require an actual drug transaction to occur but rather an agreement or a plan to commit the crime, along with at least one overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
To be convicted of drug conspiracy, the prosecution must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
A federal drug conspiracy conviction carries serious penalties, including lengthy prison sentences, steep fines, and the potential for asset forfeiture. Given the severity of these charges, defending against them requires a well-thought-out strategy.
While conspiracy charges can be complex, several defenses may be available to challenge the prosecution's case. A few common defenses include:
One of the most effective defenses in drug conspiracy cases is to argue that the defendant did not have the requisite intent to join or participate in the conspiracy. Federal drug conspiracy laws require that the defendant knew about the conspiracy and had the intent to commit the underlying drug offense.
If the defense can show that the defendant had no knowledge of the illegal nature of the activity or was unaware of the conspiracy’s existence, this can be a strong argument for lack of intent. In some cases, the defendant may have been unknowingly involved in a group that committed a crime, or their involvement was limited to non-criminal actions.
Another common defense is that the defendant’s involvement was minimal, and they should not be held accountable for the actions of the entire conspiracy. While federal drug conspiracy laws allow for the prosecution of all conspirators, the defendant may argue that they were only tangentially involved and did not contribute meaningfully to the conspiracy.
For example, the defendant may have been unaware of the scale or scope of the operation and may not have participated in any illegal acts beyond peripheral actions. This defense can help reduce the severity of the charges or even lead to a dismissal of the case.
A defendant can also defend against a drug conspiracy charge by proving that they withdrew from the conspiracy before any overt acts were committed. To successfully argue withdrawal, the defendant must show that they took affirmative steps to disassociate from the conspiracy, such as notifying others involved, abandoning their participation, or taking actions to prevent the crime from occurring.
If the defendant can prove they withdrew in a timely manner and communicated their intent to leave the conspiracy, it may prevent the defendant from being held criminally liable for subsequent actions taken by the other conspirators.
The government must prove all elements of a federal drug conspiracy charge beyond a reasonable doubt. If the defense can show that there is insufficient evidence to establish any of the required elements—such as an agreement, knowledge, or overt acts—the charges may be reduced or dropped.
In many drug conspiracy cases, the evidence presented by the prosecution may be circumstantial. For instance, the government may rely on phone records, surveillance footage, or informant testimony to link a defendant to a drug conspiracy. The defense may challenge the credibility or reliability of this evidence to undermine the prosecution’s case.
Entrapment occurs when law enforcement officers induce or encourage a defendant to commit a crime that they otherwise would not have committed. If the defendant was coerced or manipulated into participating in a drug conspiracy by government agents, they may raise an entrapment defense.
To succeed with an entrapment defense, the defendant must show that law enforcement agents used excessive persuasion, threats, or deceit to induce them to commit the crime. This defense is challenging, as the defendant must demonstrate that they had no predisposition to commit the crime before the government’s involvement.
While defending against federal drug conspiracy charges can be difficult, there have been many instances where defendants successfully challenged these charges. Here are a few case studies illustrating how these defenses have worked in practice:
In a notable case in Denver, a defendant was accused of being part of a drug conspiracy involving a large-scale methamphetamine trafficking ring. The defense team argued that the defendant had no knowledge of the conspiracy and was unaware that the individuals they were associating with were involved in illegal activities. The defense presented evidence showing that the defendant’s involvement was limited to selling used cars, and they had no knowledge of the illegal drug activities happening within their circle. The jury found that the defendant lacked the necessary intent to participate in the conspiracy, resulting in a verdict of not guilty.
In another case, a defendant was charged with conspiring to distribute cocaine. The defendant’s role in the conspiracy was limited to driving a vehicle without knowledge of the drugs hidden inside. The defense argued that the defendant’s involvement was minimal and that they did not knowingly participate in the drug trafficking activities. The defense successfully convinced the jury that the defendant was unaware of the scale of the conspiracy and was merely acting as a courier. As a result, the defendant was acquitted of the conspiracy charge.
In a third case, a defendant was charged with being part of a drug conspiracy to distribute heroin. The defense team presented evidence that the defendant had withdrawn from the conspiracy prior to any illegal transactions taking place. The defendant had stopped communicating with the other conspirators, discarded their involvement in the drug trade, and even reported the criminal activities to law enforcement. The court found that the defendant had effectively withdrawn from the conspiracy, and the charges were dismissed.
Federal drug conspiracy charges in Denver are serious, and defending against them requires an experienced criminal defense attorney who understands the complexities of federal drug law. At Perlman Defense Federal Criminal Lawyers, we are committed to protecting your rights and providing you with the best possible defense. Whether you are facing charges of lack of intent, minimal involvement, withdrawal, or lack of evidence, our experienced team will vigorously challenge the prosecution’s case and defend you against these charges. We have experience defending clients against everything from drug importation charges to drug smuggling charges.
If you or someone you know is facing federal drug conspiracy charges in Denver, Contact us today for a consultation. Let us help you navigate the legal system and secure the best possible outcome for your case.
Daniel R. Perlman, the founding attorney at Perlman Defense Federal Criminal Lawyers, leverages his extensive background as a former prosecutor to provide superior defense strategies for clients across federal courtrooms. Earning his Juris Doctor from the Catholic University of America's Columbus School of Law, he first honed his legal skills with the Maryland State’s Attorney’s Office.
This diverse experience enables him to advocate effectively, understanding prosecution tactics intimately, which he expertly counters in defense of his clients. With a profound commitment to justice, Daniel leads his team in tackling complex federal cases, from white-collar crimes to violent offenses, ensuring the highest level of defense through every phase of the criminal process.
Request Your
Confidential Consultation
Fill out the contact form or call us at (818) 383-6692 to schedule your free consultation.
"*" indicates required fields
