Drug Offenses Case Archives

This category includes cases in which Mr. Link defended residents of Philadelphia or the surrounding area accused of drug offenses or related crimes.

Commonwealth v. T.M.
October 26

Commonwealth v. T.M.

Philadelphia Housing Authority officers were in their marked patrol car when they allegedly observed T.M. run a stop sign near a housing authority property. After stopping the car, the officers claim that T.M got out of the driver’s seat and attempted to walk away from them. After drawing their guns on him, they ordered him.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID), VUFA 6106 and 6108 (Illegal Possession of a Firearm)

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress GRANTED. Case DISMISSED.

Commonwealth v. L.F.
September 28

Commonwealth v. L.F.

L.F. was the subject of a weeks-long drug investigation. Police allegedly utilized a confidential informant to purchase crack cocaine from L.F. and a co-defendant on multiple occasions, which the police claimed they observed. Officers ultimately obtained a search warrant to search two residences that the police associated with L.F., which they believed were being used.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (F), Conspiracy (F), Possession of Firearm by Prohibited Person (VUFA 6105), Possession of Firearm Without a License (VUFA 6106).

The Verdict:

Case Dismissed for Speedy Trial Violation under Rule 600(a).

Commonwealth v. G.R.
August 17

Commonwealth v. G.R.

Philadelphia narcotics police set up a surveillance at a bar in Germantown in response to complaints about narcotics sales. According to police, a car pulled into the parking lot right in front of an officer. Minutes later, a car driven by G.R. pulled up next to it. The driver of the first car approached G.R.’s.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (F), Fleeing Police (F3), Simple Possession

The Verdict:

Felony charges dismissed at preliminary hearing.

Commonwealth v. R.D.
May 16

Commonwealth v. R.D.

R.D. was arrested after police claim they saw him drop a baggie containing 54 grams of crack cocaine into the open window of a car in a high crime area in Philadelphia, and he was charged with Possession With Intent to Deliver. At trial, the officers claimed that as they turned onto the block, they.

The Charges:

Possession with Intent to Deliver

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. J.V.
March 14

Commonwealth v. J.V.

Police responding to a radio call observed J.V. matching the description of the person they were looking for and holding a screwdriver. Officers told him to drop the screwdriver and as they were handcuffing him saw narcotics in his hoodie pocket. They recover 14 packets of crack cocaine and arrest him for possession of narcotics..

The Charges:

Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress Granted. Charges withdrawn.

Commonwealth v. M.J.
December 14

Commonwealth v. M.J.

Police conducting a narcotics surveillance observed M.J. and 6-7 other men involved in a dice game on the sidewalk. During a thirty minute period, police claim three different individuals approach M.J. and hand him money. Each time M.J. would then enter a nearby car and retrieve “objects” and hand those objects to the “buyers.” All.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (F)

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. H.C.
October 26

Commonwealth v. H.C.

Police stopped a van being driven by H.C. for not using headlights. During the car stop, one of the officers allegedly observed three packages of what he knew to be heroin for a total of 495 packets. The officer claimed they were within inches of H.C.’s leg, and that no one else was in the.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (F)

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. J.M.
October 22

Commonwealth v. J.M.

J.M. was arrested after a Philadelphia narcotics sergeant and another officer on patrol alleged that they saw him in a narcotics transaction with two other males. The Sgt. claimed that as she was driving she saw J.M. hand another male a large bag of marijuana, who then placed the bag in a mailbox. When the.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver, Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not Guilty.

Commonwealth v. T.D.
September 15

Commonwealth v. T.D.

Police on routine patrol observed a car driven by T.D. fail to use a turn signal. Due to the fact that T.D. did not have a valid driver’s license and the car was a rental, police asked him to step out of the car. At the same time, another officer noticed that the front seat.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (F), Conspiracy (F)

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress Evidence Granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. F.C.
August 14

Commonwealth v. F.C.

Police were stopped in their car at a traffic light when officers claimed that they smelled marijuana coming from F.C.’s car, which was parked legally. As the officers approached F.C., they claim he made a quick movement under his seat. F.C. was removed from the car and police alleged that they recovered 24 packets of.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. B.A.
August 10

Commonwealth v. B.A.

Police observed B.A. driving his car in West Philly in an area the police described as a corridor to the Philadelphia drug trade from the main line. Officers stopped his car after they claim he performed a “park up”, where a driver pulls over to avoid being followed by police. The reason for the stop.

The Charges:

Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress Granted. Charges Dismissed.

Commonwealth v. J.R.
July 22

Commonwealth v. J.R.

J.R., who was on state parole, went in to the parole officer to meet with an agent. During the meeting, the parole officer took J.R.’s phone and searched it. On the phone, the officer observed photographs of large amounts of cash, and one photograph of a gun. Based on these observations, parole agents decided to.

The Charges:

Possession with Intent to Deliver (PWID) Illegal Firearms (VUFA)

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress granted. Charges withdrawn.

Commonwealth v. M.J.
April 22

Commonwealth v. M.J.

Police pulled over M.J. in a car he was driving for a defective brake light. During the traffic stop, the officer claimed that he observed a cigarette in plain view that he knew was dipped in codeine syrup. M.J. allegedly handed the cigarette over to the police and then voluntarily handed over a whole jar.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. Charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. M.E.
April 2

Commonwealth v. M.E.

Philadelphia police investigating the sale of narcotics utilized a confidential informant on three separate occasions to purchase large amounts of heroin. Police alleged that M.E. was involved in each of the transactions, and that he was seen accepting money from co-defendants and that he was using a particular residence as a “stash house.” Police then.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver, Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. L.B.
March 25

Commonwealth v. L.B.

Police set up a narcotics surveillance on the 3200 block of N.33rd Street. Officers claimed that L.B. left a dice game in an alley on two occasions to sell narcotics to separate buyers, and that they recovered drugs off of them. During the next two hours several other transactions were allegedly made by other dealers..

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver, Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not Guilty of All Charges

Commonwealth v. M.P.
March 12

Commonwealth v. M.P.

After receiving a tip, police utilized a confidential informant to purchase marijuana from M.P. at his house on three separate occasions. Each time, police observed the transaction. After the third buy, police raided the residence and seized bulk marijuana, scales, money, proof of residency and a firearm that was behind a sofa. Due to M.P.’s.

The Charges:

VUFA (Illegal Firearms) Possession with Intent to Deliver

The Verdict:

Not guilty on gun charges.

Commonwealth v. K.M.
March 5

Commonwealth v. K.M.

A police officer in an unmarked car claimed he saw K.M. double park and then hand an unknown item to another individual in a parked car. That person “fled” the area and the officer stopped K.M. for investigation after he drove away. As the officer approached the car, he allegedly saw K.M. toss a baggie.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Simple Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. A.W.
February 20

Commonwealth v. A.W.

Police conducting a surveillance on 2300 Fawn Street in Philadelphia alleged that they observed A.W. and a co-defendant selling cocaine out of an abandoned lot to several unknown people. They were arrested near the lot, and police recovered a gun and numerous packets of cocaine from the lot. At trial, the officers presented an inconsistent.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver) VUFA (illegal firearms), Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not guilty of all charges

Commonwealth v. L.H.
January 23

Commonwealth v. L.H.

According to police, three officers were conducting a surveillance of an alleyway near Stella and Mayfield Streets in Kensington. They claimed that L.H. (a black man) conducted a drug transaction with a white man in the alley. They claim that they found one packet of cocaine on the white male which is considered a drug.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (F)

The Verdict:

Not Guilty

Commonwealth v. A.V.
January 23

Commonwealth v. A.V.

Narcotics officers received information about drug dealing on a specific block in West Philadelphia. Based on that information, they utilize a confidential informant to purchase cocaine on the block. Police claim they observed A.V. sell the informant cocaine on two separate occasions after first going into a house. Then, the following day, the observe A.V..

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Cocaine (F) Simple Possession of Marijuana

The Verdict:

Not guilty of felony possession and delivery charges

Commonwealth v. J.R.
December 17

Commonwealth v. J.R.

Philadelphia police set up a narcotics surveillance on the 3300 Block of H Street. An officer claimed that he observed a Chevy Tahoe pull onto the block and that J.R. got into the vehicle for a few moments. When he exited he stuck a rack of heroin into his waistband and entered a house on.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver, Conspiracy, Possession of Illegal Firearms (VUFA)

The Verdict:

All charges dismissed

Commonwealth v. J.D.
November 18

Commonwealth v. J.D.

Narcotics officers on routine patrol in the East Mount Airy section of the City observed J.D. riding a bike on the sidewalk at 1 AM. Believing that to be a violation of a City ordinance, police stopped him, searched him, and found 26 packets of crack cocaine in his pocket. The defense filed a motion.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Possession of a Controlled Substance

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. Charges Dismissed

Commonwealth v. M.J.
November 13

Commonwealth v. M.J.

Police set up a narcotics surveillance in Germantown and observed M.J. and two other males allegedly involved in a drug distribution operation. Police testified that a co-defendant supplied drugs M.J. from an alley and that M.J. then supplied those drugs (crack cocaine and marijuana) to individual buyers, some of whom were stopped with drugs on.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID) Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not guilty of all charges

Commonwealth v. K.T.
October 29

Commonwealth v. K.T.

Philadelphia police on routine patrol observed K.T. driving a car with a defective brake light in what they described as a “high crime area.” Police initiated a stop of his car, and according to the arresting officer he observed a blue pill in plain view that he immediately recognized as oxycodone and a drug offense.

The Charges:

Possession with Intent to Deliver Possession of a Controlled Substance

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. J.D.
October 17

Commonwealth v. J.D. – Narcotics

JD was arrested inside of a house after police executing a search warrant seized over 25 grams of crack cocaine and packaging material. The defense filed a motion to suppress evidence and argued that the police did not articulate an adequate basis for the search in the affidavit of probable cause, and that therefore all.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. E.J.
October 1

Commonwealth v. E.J.

Police conducting a narcotics surveillance of a house in Germantown alleged that they observed multiple drug transactions out of, and near the house by E.J. and several other alleged co-conspirators. Based on their surveillance, police arrested E.J. and the other individuals and searched the house that was the target of the investigation for drug possession.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (PWID) Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. K.S.
August 26

Commonwealth of PA v. K.S.

K.S. was arrested for narcotics violation and drug offenses in Philadelphia after police pull him over for allegedly failing to use a turn signal. After approaching the car, which belonged to K.S., police claim they saw small baggies containing cocaine in plain view in the center console. At a motion to suppress evidence, the defense.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID)

The Verdict:

Motion to Suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. F.F.
August 19

Commonwealth v. F.F.

Pennsylvania State Police executed a search warrant at a residence in Philadelphia looking for evidence of a burglary. Although they failed to find what they were looking for, troopers found a large amount of heroin, cocaine, a gun, ammunition, scales and packaging material. F.F. was arrested for gun offenses and drug offenses.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID) VUFA Conspiracy

The Verdict:

All charges dismissed

Commonwealth v. D.M.
August 6

Commonwealth v. D.M.

Police set up a narcotics surveillance and observed DM and a co-defendant grabbing “items” out of the window of an abandoned house. The two of them were also observed in conversations and “exchanges” with other unidentified people who were not stopped by police. Eventually, the surveillance officer instructed back up officers to move in and.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID) Conspiracy Simple Possession

The Verdict:

Felony charges dismissed

Commonwealth v. D.R.
July 15

Commonwealth v. D.R.

Police set up a surveillance on a known drug corner in the Kensington section of the city. Less than five minutes after setting up their surveillance they noticed D.R. and another male engage in a “hand to hand transaction” that involved money for objects. Based on that transaction the police initiated a stop of DR.

The Charges:

Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. Charges dismissed.

Commonwealth of PA v. D.T.
May 15

Commonwealth of PA v. D.T.

D.T. was arrested for possession with intent to deliver narcotics after police allege they observed him selling heroin to two individuals. Police claim they saw D.T. remove items from a Newport box that was hidden in a park fence and exchange those items for money with the two males. Police testified that they arrested D.T..

The Charges:

Possession with intent to deliver narcotics

The Verdict:

Not guilty all charges.

Commonwealth of PA v. W.K.
May 2

Commonwealth v. W.K.

During the execution of a search warrant, Philadelphia police recovered over 5 grams of crack cocaine, scales and packaging material in W.K.’s house. Ordinarily, the Defendant would have been facing a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 to 6 years in incarceration based on the weight of the drugs. However, the defense argued that a recent.

The Charges:

Mandatory minimum sentence of 3 to 6 years in incarceration based on the weight of the drugs

The Verdict:

Mandatory Sentences for Drug Offenses Declared Unconstitutional

Commonwealthof PA v. T.J.
April 16

Commonwealth of PA v. T.J.

Philadelphia police began investigating T.J. after receiving information that he was involved in drug sales. Police utilized a confidential informant to purchase marijuana from him on three separate dates. On each occasion, police followed him back to his house. Based on the sales to the C.I. and his ties to the address, police executed a.

The Charges:

VUFA (gun charges); Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (PWID)

The Verdict:

Not guilty of all gun charges. Client released from custody.

Commonwealth of PA v. A.E.
April 15

Commonwealth v. A.E.

Defendant was charged in Philadelphia with drug possession and intent to deliver a controlled substance and conspiracy. Police testified that they observed defendant and another male selling narcotics in the area of 100 Somerset Street in Philadelphia. Police stopped two alleged “buyers” and allegedly recovered crack cocaine and heroin. The defense successfully challenged the quality of.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (PWID) and Conspiracy

The Verdict:

Not guilty of all charges

Commonwealth of PA v. R.T.
April 15

Commonwealth v. R.T.

Defendant was charged with felony possession with intent to deliver narcotics and drug charges. Police alleged that they observed R.T. with a clear baggie in his hand, holding small items that he was about to give to an unidentified male. After police approached, R.T. allegedly fled and discarded a plastic baggie with 15 packets of.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (PWID) and Simple Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Felony PWID charge dismissed after preliminary hearing

Commonwealth v. L.B.
March 28

Commonwealth v. L.B.

Philadelphia narcotics officers set up a surveillance on a known drug corner. The officers allegedly observed L.B and two co-defendants engage in narcotics activity, and when they raided the block, recovered drugs out of L.B.’s pocket, as well as large amounts of crack cocaine and packaging materials out of several nearby houses. At the preliminary.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID), Conspiracy, and Simple Possession.

The Verdict:

PWID and Conspiracy dismissed for lack of evidence.

Commonwealth v. T.D.
March 21

Commonwealth v. T.D.

Defendant was arrested for aggravated assault, robbery, and gun charges after allegedly brandishing a firearm at a center city business and stealing cash from a safe. T.D. was facing a mandatory minimum 10-20 years in jail under Pennsylvania’s three strike law. Three employees identified T.D. as the person committing the crime. However, a vigorous defense.

The Charges:

Robbery, Aggravated Assault, VUFA (gun charges)

The Verdict:

Not guilty of all charges

Commonwealth v. M.H.
December 30

Commonwealth v. M.H.

Philadelphia Police set up a narcotics surveillance and saw M.H. engaging in conversations with the target of the surveillance, who was making numerous drug transactions on the street. M.H. then allegedly fled into a house when back-up units converged in the area. M.H. was apprehended inside of the house, as well as the targeted drug.

The Charges:

Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. T.H.
November 15

Commonwealth v. T.H.

United States marshalls were armed with an arrest warrant for T.H. and enter the house where they had information he was staying. T.H. is arrested on scene for drug possession and police recovered over thirty grams of crack cocaine, drug packaging materials and scales throughout the house. Bail was set at $500,000. A judge agreed.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID) and Conspiracy

The Verdict:

All charges dismissed for lack of evidence.

Commonwealth v. T.J.
September 11

Commonwealth v. T.J.

Client was driving a car that was stopped for failing to use a turn signal. During the car stop, Philadelphia police allege that he reached into the glove box where they observed a quantity of drugs. Police removed T.J. from the car and recovered the drugs. Philadelphia drug crimes lawyer R. Patrick Link successfully argued that the.

The Charges:

Possession of Narcotics

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress evidence granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. J.W.
June 7

Commonwealth v. J.W.

Police testified at a motion to suppress evidence that they observed the client in a “high crime area” attempting to walk away from them and acting nervously. Based on these observations, police searched the client and recovered narcotics. Philadelphia drug attorney R. Patrick Link argued that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop J.W. and.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID)

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress evidence granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. M.D.
June 7

Commonwealth v. M.D.

Client was pulled over by police for driving a car with illegal tint. Officers testified at a motion to suppress that they smelled marijuana and believed that the client was “acting nervously”.  As a result police searched client and recovered a large amount of narcotics. Philadelphia drug lawyer R. Patrick Link conducted an extensive cross-examination.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver (PWID)

The Verdict:

Motion to suppress evidence granted. All charges dismissed.

Commonwealth v. W.G.
May 1

Commonwealth v. W.G.

Client was charged with possession with intent to deliver narcotics after police officers on a surveillance allegedly observed him make a sale to an individual who was stopped with drugs on him. Client was stopped several minutes later on the same block, which was in a school zone making this a “mandatory-minimum” case. R. Patrick.

The Charges:

Possession With Intent to Deliver Narcotics (PWID)

The Verdict:

Not guilty.