Drug Possession: Fingerprints?
I have written previously on “affirmative-links,” in this blog. In order to charge a person with possession of a drug, the State must prove that (1) the person knew the substance in his possession was contraband, and (2) the person exercised care, custody, control, or management over the substance. Mere presence in the area where the drug was found is not sufficient to show the person “possessed” the drug. Possession involves more than being where the action is—it involves exercising dominion or control over the thing actually possessed. In order to prove “care, custody, control, or management” the State relies on “affirmative links”; essentially, these are facts that link the person to the contraband (e.g. presence of drug paraphernalia when drugs are found nearby, etc.)
But are fingerprints on the packaging of the drug itself sufficient to “link” the accused to the drug?
Well, it depends. The short answer is that it depends on whether the person’s prints were found on the immediate packaging of the drug (e.g. on the Ziploc bag containing the cocaine), or on some secondary packaging (e.g., on a shopping bag which contained a Ziploc bag containing cocaine inside it.) Courts have found “no special connection” (i.e. no affirmative link proving possession of the drug) where the accused’s fingerprints were found on the outer shopping bag which contained a sealable bag, which contained smaller bags of contained. In another case, where a person was found in abandoned house and fled when police arrive, only to be stopped later, the court found insufficient evidence to link the person with a syringe of cocaine found nearby when the person’s fingerprints were found on a jar filled with water. (Officers had testified that water is generally used to dilute cocaine before injection.) Why? Common sense prevails here: there was no proof that the shopping bag contained contraband when the prints were made on by the accused; and a jar with water is not contraband, and there was no proof that the person used the water to mix with cocaine (just conjecture by the cop.)
Of course, where fingerprints are found on the packaging containing the contraband, provide those prints can be dated and attributed to the accused, prints represent an affirmative link (but far from a case-closed type of link.)