Criminal Lawyers for Drug Houses (Narcopisos) Defense
Specialized defense in drug house (narcopisos) cases. Home search legality, domicile inviolability, and ownership challenges.
Last updated:
Drug houses (narcopisos) are dwellings used as retail drug distribution points. Common in certain urban neighborhoods, these apartments attract drug buyers and create significant community disturbance. Police operations against drug houses typically involve coordinated raids with search warrants.
What Are Drug Houses
A drug house is a dwelling used as a point of sale for drugs. The conduct remains a trafficking offence under Art. 368 CP, but it presents a procedural particularity of the first order: to access the evidence, the police must enter a home, which activates reinforced constitutional guarantees. Another particularity is the plurality of people usually present —owner, occupants, consumers, visitors—, which requires carefully delimiting the liability of each one. The mere fact of being in the property does not automatically make a person responsible for the point of sale; the prosecution must prove the specific participation of each individual.
Search Legality
The inviolability of the home (Art. 18.2 Spanish Constitution) can only be limited by reasoned judicial authorization, the occupant's consent, or flagrant crime. In drug house cases, the legality of the entry and search is, almost always, the most vulnerable point of the prosecution's case, because all the incriminating evidence (the drugs, the tools, the cash) derives from that entry. Our defense therefore meticulously examines every aspect of the search warrant and its execution: insufficient motivation, a flagrancy that was not strict, vitiated consent, the absence of the Court Clerk where required, or a disproportionate scope.
Defense Strategies
On that basis, the defense focuses on: challenging the search warrant's legal basis —where the violation of the fundamental right is established, the radical nullity of the diligence operates and, by connection of unlawfulness (Art. 11.1 LOPJ), that of all derived evidence—; proving the client had no knowledge or control over the drugs found (shared apartments, visitors, subletting); disputing drug quantities and purity through independent laboratory analysis; and arguing that the evidence was improperly handled during seizure, breaking the chain of custody. The aim is to clearly separate the organizer of the point of sale from those who merely happened to be in the property.
Penalty Chart
| Type / Scenario | Criminal Penalty |
|---|---|
| Principal Penalty | Penalty depends on substance type and quantity found. |
| Fines | Fines proportional to the estimated value of seized substances. |
| Asset Forfeiture | Risk of seizure of the property and other assets. |
* Penalties shown are indicative. The actual penalty depends on case circumstances, applicable mitigating and aggravating factors.
Our Defense Strategy
Search Nullity
Challenging the legality of the home entry and search warrant.
Drug Crimes in Spain: Defence Guide for Trafficking, Possession and Cannabis Clubs
Drug offences are among the most prosecuted crimes in Spain. Articles 368-378 of the Criminal Code distinguish between drugs that cause serious harm to health (cocaine, heroin, amphetamines) and those of lesser harm (cannabis, MDMA). This distinction is pivotal — it directly determines the minimum and maximum prison sentences applicable.
Penalty Table: Drug Offences
| Offence | Article | Substance type | Penalty |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic drug trafficking | Art. 368 | Serious harm (cocaine) | 3 – 6 years |
| Basic drug trafficking | Art. 368 | Lesser harm (cannabis) | 1 – 3 years |
| Aggravated trafficking (Art. 369) | Art. 369 | Large amounts/minors | 4.5 – 9 / 1.5 – 4.5 years |
| Criminal organisation (Art. 369 bis) | Art. 369 bis | Organised crime | 9 – 12 years |
| International trafficking (Art. 370) | Art. 370 | Cross-border/large scale | Upper half of applicable range |
| Personal possession (own use) | Not criminal | Personal amounts | Administrative fine only |
Key Defence Strategies
Own-Use Defence (Art. 368 CP)
If the quantity found corresponds to personal consumption patterns and there are no aggravating signs (scales, bags, large amounts of cash), the defence argues the substance was for personal use — not a criminal offence.
Cannabis Social Club Defence
Legally constituted cannabis clubs do not constitute drug trafficking if: membership is adult-only, closed distribution, no profit, no promotion, and quantities correspond to established consumption levels.
Challenging the 'Large Amount' Threshold
The threshold for 'large amount' (notoria importancia) is fixed by case law, not statute. Precise weighing with deduction of adulterants can bring quantities below the threshold.
Breaking the Chain of Custody
Drug evidence is often challenged on chain of custody grounds. Procedural irregularities in seizure, sealing, transfer or analysis can invalidate the forensic evidence.
Criminal Organization: Proving Role
Being part of an organisation requires stable, hierarchical structure. Sporadic cooperation or a minor role (driver, lookout) does not automatically trigger Art. 369 bis penalties.
Controlled Delivery and Police Provocation
Evidence obtained through unlawful police provocation (agent provocateur) is inadmissible. Distinguish between undercover infiltration (lawful) and provocation of an offence that would not otherwise occur.
Specific Mitigating Factors in Drug Offences
Addiction (Art. 21.2 CP)
Proven drug dependence can operate as mitigating (simple), highly qualified mitigating, or even incomplete defence, significantly reducing the penalty. Requires psychological and medical expert reports demonstrating that the addiction affected the offender's ability to understand the unlawfulness of their conduct.
Active Collaboration (Art. 376 CP)
Provides a 1-2 degree penalty reduction for the informant who supplies effective evidence to identify other suspects or dismantle the organisation. The information must be NEW, VERIFIABLE, and USEFUL. Strategic assessment is crucial before cooperating.
Shared Consumption Doctrine
The Supreme Court has defined 5 cumulative requirements: habitual identified consumers, closed premises, moderate quantity for immediate use, simultaneous consumption, and absence of profit. Failure of any one requirement converts the conduct into trafficking.
'Notoria Importancia' Thresholds by Substance
| Substance | Threshold (Pure) | Gross equivalent (approx.) | Penalty impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cocaine | 750 g pure | ~3–5 kg gross | 6–9 years |
| Heroin | 300 g pure | ~1–2 kg gross | 6–9 years |
| Hashish | 2,500 g THC | ~10 kg material | 1.5–4.5 years |
| MDMA | 240 g pure | ~720 pills | 6–9 years |
| Amphetamine | 90 g pure | ~300 g gross | 6–9 years |
| Methamphetamine | 15 g pure | ~30 g gross | 6–9 years |
Key Supreme Court Rulings
The Supreme Court confirms that cannabis clubs are lawful if they are genuinely closed associations, membership is strictly adult, no promotion is carried out beyond the membership, and quantities do not exceed personal consumption patterns. Any failure of these conditions may constitute drug trafficking.
The 'large amount' threshold must be calculated on the pure substance after subtracting adulterants and impurities. Gross weight is not the correct measurement. The defence should always request an independent quantitative analysis.
If police provocation created the intent to commit the offence (the accused would not have acted without the provocation), evidence is excluded under Art. 11.1 LOPJ. Mere opportunity provided by an undercover officer does not amount to provocation.
From Arrest to Trial: Key Procedural Stages
Arrest & Police Custody
Maximum 72 hours. Right to a lawyer and to remain silent. Never testify without your lawyer present.
Court Hearing (Art. 505 LECrim)
Within 72 hours. Judge decide: release, bail, or pretrial detention. Critical hearing for drug trafficking cases.
Investigation Phase
Analysis of evidence, expert reports (toxicology, purity). Period to challenge wiretaps and searches. Duration: 6-18 months.
Interim Order / Indictment
Prosecution formalises charges. Defense may request dismissal or downgrading of charges.
Oral Hearing
Trial before Provincial Court (basic trafficking) or National Court (organisation/international). Duration: 1 day to several months in macro-cases.
Why Choose Us?
Need a criminal defense lawyer for this type of offense? Here's how we work:
Do you need specialised legal assistance?
The judicial system is complex. We have the criminal-law specialisation and technical resources required to take on the defence.