Business Law Case Study.
The case study involves Rance, an event promoter, who has been charged with the offense of advertising an event at which drugs will be sold. It is important to note that Rance was not aware that the event would sell any drugs and when the police searched his home, they did not find any drugs or drug paraphernalia. Moreover, there is no statute that defines the offense he is charged with. With this and other logical reasons presented in this paper, Rance is innocent and cannot be convicted on the named charges.
The prosecution lacks any evidence of possession. In reference to the Common Wealth Vs Stephen Brzezinski case, proof of constructive possession requires the knowledge, in cooperation with the ability and intent to exercise control (Commonwealth of Massachusets, 2018). In this instance, Rance was in his line of duty serving a client while totally oblivious of the client’s intention to sell drugs at the concert. It was also argued in Common Wealth Vs Stephen Brzezinski, that one’s presence in an area where a drug is found, cannot solely prove prerequisite knowledge, power, or intent to control the drug (Commonwealth of Massachusets, 2018). Rance is incognizant that the building he leased for the concert is owned by a criminal. He is manipulated into thinking that it is owned by a front corporation.
In this case, the parties who should be charged are the client who hired Rance and Wilhelm Bulging who is the building owner. The client should be charged with an offense of actual drug possession, an intent to distribute, and drug trafficking. Wilhelm, the building owner, should be charged with an offense of intent to distribute since he knowingly provided a location for the distribution of XTC.
Commonwealth of Massachusets. (2018). COMMONWEALTH vs. STEPHEN BRZEZINSKI. Retrieved from Commonwealth of massachusets: http://masscases.com/cases/sjc/405/405mass401.html