How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Zoey_ JD Your Own Question
Zoey_ JD
Zoey_ JD, JustAnswer Criminal Law Mentor
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 27460
Experience:  Admitted to NYS Criminal defense bar in 1989. Extensive arraignment, hearing, trial experience.
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Zoey_ JD is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Do you have to make a drug sell to a undercover or be caught

Customer Question

Do you have to make a drug sell to a undercover or be caught with drugs to be charged with engagement in the pattern of corrupt activity
Submitted: 1 year ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  Zoey_ JD replied 1 year ago.


No you don't have to be the hand-to-hand dealer or have drugs on your person to be arrested and charged with being part of organized drug activity. There are people in drug cartels who further the criminal activity but who don't work directly with drugs. On the street level there are also steerers and look-outs who may not have drugs themselves but whose role is to bring on customers, collect the money, or watch for police.

There would have to be evidence of some kind to link these people to the criminal activity, because the state must prove their complicity beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you have a specific situation in mind, use the reply tab to explain.

Customer: replied 1 year ago.
Is a wiretap along enough to prove a specific weight of drugs when there were no drugs recovered
Expert:  Zoey_ JD replied 1 year ago.

Impossible for me to say for sure. It would depend on what the wiretap evidence revealed. There are cases, however, where evidence of that sort to tie someone into a conspiracy has been considered impermissibly speculative. So there's certainly precedent to make an argument that the evidence would not be sufficient.