Defenses to Pa. Charges of Drug Delivery Resulting in Death

The crime of “drug delivery resulting in death” (DDRD) is a type of homicide in Pennsylvania. It reflects the state’s stringent stance against the opioid crisis and drug-related fatalities. The crime consists of intentionally or knowingly delivering, distributing or dispensing a controlled substance or counterfeit controlled substance, which directly results in another person’s death. This offense carries severe penalties and requires the prosecution to meet specific criteria to secure a conviction.

To obtain a DDRD conviction under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2506, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. The defendant delivered, distributed, or dispensed a controlled substance or counterfeit controlled substance.
2. The substance was ingested or used by the victim.
3. The ingestion or use of the substance directly caused the victim’s death.

One of the significant challenges for prosecutors in DDRD cases is establishing the causal link between the drug provided by the defendant and the victim’s death. Given the complexities of toxicology and the potential presence of multiple substances in the victim’s system, this can be a contentious point in many cases.

Another major complication in DDRD cases is the uncertainty surrounding the content of drugs. Despite labels or identifiers, drugs sold on the street often contain undisclosed substances. Synthetic opioids, particularly fentanyl, are frequently mixed into other drugs such as heroin or cocaine, dramatically increasing their lethality. This unpredictability can complicate both the prosecution’s case and the defense strategy. Defendants may argue that they were unaware of the presence of fentanyl or other deadly additives, challenging the assertion that they knowingly delivered a substance capable of causing death.

These defenses may be available to those facing DDRD charges:

1. Lack of causation — The defense can argue that the prosecution failed to prove that the drug delivered by the defendant was the direct cause of death. This might involve presenting evidence of other substances in the victim’s system or alternative causes of death.
2. Unawareness of drug content — A defendant might claim they were unaware that the substance contained lethal additives like fentanyl. This defense can be complex, as it hinges on demonstrating the defendant’s lack of knowledge and intent.
3. Intervening factors — The defense might argue that other intervening factors, such as the victim’s pre-existing health conditions or the involvement of multiple drugs, contributed to the death, thus breaking the causal chain required for a DDRD conviction.
4. Entrapment — The defendant may be able to show that law enforcement induced them to commit the crime they would not have otherwise committed.

The penalties for a DDRD conviction are severe. The crime is classified as a felony, carrying a mandatory minimum sentence of five years and a fine of $15,000. Moreover, the penalties can be significantly harsher, with sentences potentially extending up to 40 years, depending on the circumstances and any prior criminal record of the defendant. Given the severe consequences of a DDRD conviction, it is important for defendants to seek skilled legal representation to obtain an effective defense.

The Law Offices of David Jay Glassman has for decades been providing criminal defense for clients in the greater Philadelphia metropolitan area. If you are under investigation for drugs or are facing federal or state drug charges, feel free to contact us online or call 215-563-7100 for an initial consultation.