How A Traffic Stop Can Lead To Federal Drug Trafficking Charges

How A Traffic Stop Can Lead To Federal Drug Trafficking Charges

When we represent clients pulled over on suspicion of DWI, we often stress that a routine traffic stop can turn into something far more serious. Under Texas law, a simple driving-while-intoxicated stop can escalate if officers discover illicit substances in your vehicle. What began as a state misdemeanor or felony DWI arrest may end with federal drug trafficking charges carrying decades in prison. It’s vital to understand how federal authorities get involved, what statutes apply, and what defenses you can raise when your rights are at risk.

A traffic stop gives officers lawful authority to investigate driving offenses under the Texas Transportation Code. However, once officers detect evidence of drug activity—through an odor of marijuana, visible drug paraphernalia, or canine alerts—they may expand the scope of the stop. That expansion can include vehicle searches, seizures of evidence, and involvement of federal agencies like the DEA. Federal prosecutors then may apply the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), particularly 21 U.S.C. § 841, to charge you with trafficking or possession with intent to distribute.

We will now explain:

• How a DWI stop can lead to reasonable suspicion of drug trafficking
• The interplay between Texas DWI law (Tex. Penal Code § 49.04) and federal drug statutes
• The elements prosecutors must prove under 21 U.S.C. § 841
• Potential legal defenses to federal trafficking charges
• The ramifications of a federal indictment for you and your family

Our goal is to equip you with knowledge of both state and federal law so you can protect your rights from the moment you’re pulled over.

Traffic Stops Under Texas DWI Law and Their Expansion

Initial Stop For Suspected DWI

An officer may lawfully stop a vehicle if they have reasonable suspicion that the driver is intoxicated, based on observable facts. Signs of impairment—slurred speech, weaving, or failing field sobriety tests—justify detention and investigation for DWI under Texas Penal Code § 49.04.

From DWI To Drug Suspicion

Once a traffic stop is lawful, officers may rely on the plain view doctrine to observe any visible evidence of criminal activity. If they detect the odor of marijuana, see drug paraphernalia, or observe drug residue, these factors may contribute to reasonable suspicion or probable cause to extend the investigation—though post-2019 Texas law requires additional context due to the legalization of hemp. A drug-sniffing canine alert, when conducted during a lawful stop and without prolonging it, can establish probable cause for a vehicle search under Illinois v. Caballes, 543 U.S. 405 (2005).

Federal Drug Trafficking Statutes And Penalties

Controlled Substances Act – 21 U.S.C. § 841

Depending on the type and quantity of the controlled substance that is the subject of the offense, 21 U.S.C. § 841 requires mandatory minimum penalties in certain cases. What mandatory minimum applies comes down primarily to the quantity threshold at play. The below table illustrates the mandatory minimum penalties that are triggered by the quantity threshold of the controlled substance.

Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Selected Controlled Substances

Thresholds under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1) and 960(b)

21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 963 – Attempts and Conspiracies

Under 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 963, federal law imposes the same penalties on individuals who attempt or conspire to commit drug offenses as it does on those who complete the underlying crimes.

To secure a conviction for an attempted drug offense, prosecutors must demonstrate that the defendant had a clear intent to carry out the unlawful act and took a meaningful step toward accomplishing it. This “substantial step” can include actions like coordinating the terms and location of a drug transaction or taking physical action to follow through, such as acquiring chemicals and tools to operate a drug manufacturing lab.

In cases of conspiracy, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a criminal agreement existed between two or more individuals to commit a drug-related offense, and that the accused knowingly and voluntarily joined that agreement. Importantly, a person may be found guilty of conspiracy to distribute narcotics even if they never personally completed a sale.

When determining the appropriate sentence, the total quantity of the same type of drug involved in the conspiracy, so long as it’s proven beyond a reasonable doubt, may be combined to establish the penalties under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1) and 960(b).

Intersection of State DWI and Federal Trafficking Charges

Dual Prosecution Risks

A person may face both state DWI charges under Texas Penal Code § 49.04 and federal drug trafficking charges stemming from the same traffic stop. While the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment generally prohibits being tried twice for the same offense, it does not apply across state and federal jurisdictions because they are considered separate sovereigns (United States v. Lanza, 260 U.S. 377 (1922); reaffirmed in Gamble v. United States, 587 U.S. ___ (2019)). Therefore, even if a traffic stop results only in a low BAC reading or a refusal to submit to chemical testing, officers may still pursue federal trafficking charges if drugs are discovered during the stop.

License Suspension and Criminal Collateral Consequences

Under Texas Transportation Code §§ 524.011 and 724.035, a DWI arrest can lead to an administrative suspension of the driver’s license, even before a criminal conviction. On the federal side, drug trafficking convictions can result in immigration consequences for non-citizens, forfeiture of vehicles used in the offense under 18 U.S.C. § 982(a)(2)(A), and the long-term disabilities associated with felony convictions, including loss of certain civil rights.

Building a Defense To Federal Trafficking Charges

Challenging the Traffic Stop and Search

We first assess whether the traffic stop for suspected DWI was based on reasonable suspicion, as required under the Fourth Amendment. If the stop was improper or if officers unlawfully prolonged the stop to conduct a drug investigation, any resulting evidence may be subject to suppression. Additionally, if a drug-sniffing dog alert was used to justify a search, we scrutinize the timing, reliability, and training records of the canine unit. In cases involving search warrants, if the warrant affidavit contains false or misleading information made intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth, we may seek to suppress evidence under Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978).

Disputing Knowledge and Intent

To convict under federal law for drug trafficking under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly possessed a controlled substance and had the intent to distribute it. As part of the defense, we evaluate whether the defendant had actual or constructive possession, meaning control over the substance or the area where it was found. We also scrutinize the reliability of forensic drug testing, the integrity of the chain of custody, and whether the defendant was aware of the drug’s presence.

Entrapment and Coercion Defenses

In limited circumstances, a defendant may raise an entrapment defense if the evidence shows that law enforcement or a government informant induced them to commit a crime they were not otherwise predisposed to commit. Under Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (1932), and later clarified in Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992), the key elements are government inducement and the absence of prior intent or predisposition on the part of the defendant.

Sentencing Mitigation

If a client is convicted or chooses to plead guilty, we evaluate eligibility for relief from mandatory minimums under the safety valve provisions in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f), which allow qualifying defendants to be sentenced below statutory minimums. We also advocate for a fair sentence under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and consider seeking a sentence reduction under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 35(b) when the defendant provides substantial assistance to the government.

The Importance of Early Legal Intervention

Protecting Your Rights During an Investigation

From the moment of initial law enforcement interaction, statements to law enforcement and evidence handling are critical. We urge clients to invoke their Constitutional rights – speak as little as possible during the investigatory phase, and if arrested, do not speak to law enforcement without an attorney present.

Long-Term Ramifications of Federal Convictions

Criminal Record and Employment

A conviction for federal drug trafficking results in a permanent criminal record that can significantly affect future employment opportunities, professional licensing eligibility, and access to housing. In addition to imprisonment and fines, federal felony convictions often carry collateral consequences, such as loss of voting rights, firearm restrictions, and ineligibility for certain federal benefits, that do not typically apply to state misdemeanors.

Asset Forfeiture

Under 21 U.S.C. § 853, federal prosecutors may seek the criminal forfeiture of assets used in or derived from drug trafficking offenses. This may include vehicles, currency, real estate, and other property that facilitated the commission of the crime or represents proceeds of the offense.

Immigration Consequences

Non-citizens convicted of drug trafficking offenses face serious immigration consequences, including removal (deportation), inadmissibility, and denial of naturalization. Such offenses are generally classified as “aggravated felonies” under the Immigration and Nationality Act, including § 101(a)(43)(B), and are deportable offenses under INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i).

A routine traffic stop for suspected DWI under Texas Penal Code § 49.04 can escalate into a federal investigation if law enforcement discovers controlled substances or other evidence suggesting drug trafficking. When that happens, individuals may face prosecution under the federal Controlled Substances Act, including charges under 21 U.S.C. § 841. The consequences of such charges can be life-altering. Our team is prepared to safeguard your constitutional rights, challenge unlawful searches or seizures, and advocate against excessive federal penalties.

Criminal Defense Frequently Asked Questions

What Should I Do Immediately After a Traffic Stop That Leads To Drug Discovery?

When officers expand a DWI stop to a drug investigation, it’s crucial that you remain calm and respectful. We advise against volunteering information or consenting to searches beyond what’s required. Politely refuse any request to search your personal belongings and invoke your Fourth Amendment rights. If or when officers proceed with a search, make mental notes about the timeline, officer statements, and any irregularities. After the incident, document everything you recall, including questions asked, your responses, and the sequence of events. This record will be invaluable when challenging the legality of the stop and search in court.

How Can We Challenge the Validity of the Traffic Stop and Subsequent Search?

To suppress evidence, we focus on whether the initial traffic stop complied with the Fourth Amendment. We scrutinize the officer’s reason for initiating the stop—did they observe a valid traffic violation? If the stop lacked legal basis, any evidence obtained afterward should be excluded under applicable law.

What Elements Must The Prosecution Prove For a Federal Drug Trafficking Charge?

To secure a conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant:

1. Knowingly possessed a controlled substance,
2. Possessed it with intent to distribute, and
3. The substance in question was a scheduled drug as defined by federal law.

While there is no set amount required to prove “trafficking,” certain quantities may trigger statutory mandatory minimums under § 841(b). Intent to distribute may be inferred from circumstantial evidence such as the quantity of drugs, packaging materials, digital scales, cash, or communications indicative of drug sales. A detailed review of possession, knowledge, and intent helps us assess whether the government can meet its burden at trial or in plea negotiations.

Can We Use Administrative Errors or Laboratory Inaccuracies As a Defense?

Yes. Laboratory testing is critical in federal drug prosecutions to establish both the identity and weight of the controlled substance. We carefully examine the chain of custody, lab accreditation, handling procedures, and analytical methodologies. Breaks in the chain of custody, mislabeled evidence, or procedural errors—such as non-compliance with standards set by the Federal Rules of Evidence—can undermine the reliability of lab results. Retaining independent forensic experts or toxicologists can help challenge questionable results and potentially lead to reduced charges or case dismissal.

What Role Does Sentencing Mitigation Play In Trafficking Cases?

Sentencing in federal drug cases is governed by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, but several avenues exist for mitigation. One key tool is the “safety valve” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f), which allows qualifying non-violent defendants to receive a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum if they meet specific criteria, including full disclosure to the government.

We also advocate for a downward variance based on mitigating factors such as limited criminal history, acceptance of responsibility, family obligations, or rehabilitation efforts. Where applicable, cooperation with authorities may qualify the defendant for a sentence reduction under Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

How Does a Federal Indictment Affect Our Texas Driver’s License and DWI Case?

A federal drug indictment by itself does not impact a Texas driver’s license. However, if the federal charges arise from a DWI-related traffic stop, the underlying DWI arrest can trigger an Administrative License Revocation (ALR) under Texas Transportation Code § 724.035. To preserve driving privileges, a request for an ALR hearing must be filed within 15 days of notice.

Federal court proceedings may also impose travel restrictions, such as pretrial release conditions or passport surrender, which can interfere with state court obligations. Our team ensures proper coordination between federal and state cases to protect both driving privileges and the client’s due process rights in each forum.

What Are the Long-Term Consequences of a Federal Conviction Beyond Prison Time?

Federal drug convictions carry serious collateral consequences beyond incarceration and fines. These may include:

• A permanent federal felony record,
• Loss of voting rights and firearm rights (subject to state law restoration),
• Restrictions on professional licensing, housing, and employment,
• Potential immigration consequences such as removal, inadmissibility, or denial of naturalization for non-citizens, and
• Asset forfeiture under 21 U.S.C. § 853, including seizure of vehicles, bank accounts, or real estate linked to the offense.

We challenge forfeiture actions by disputing the connection between property and the alleged criminal activity or by negotiating resolutions to preserve essential assets. Early strategic planning helps reduce the broader impact of a conviction on our clients’ lives.

Contact Our Galveston County Drug Trafficking Defense Lawyers

If you face the dual threat of state DWI and federal drug trafficking charges, help is only a phone call away. At Mark Diaz & Associates, we defend your rights vigorously, challenge unconstitutional stops, and craft tailored strategies to protect your freedom and future.

Contact our dedicated team of Galveston federal drug trafficking attorneys at Mark Diaz & Associates today by calling 409-515-6170 to schedule your free consultation. We represent clients in Galveston and throughout Houston, providing the experienced advocacy you need when the stakes are highest.