New Bedford Trafficking in 200 Grams or More of Fentanyl
Criminal Charges:
Man arrested in New Bedford and charged in the Bristol County; Bristol County Superior Court for:
- Trafficking in 200 Grams or More of Fentanyl – M.G.L. c. 94C, § 32E(c)(4)
Case Overview:
A grand jury returned an indictment charging a man in Bristol County Superior Court with Trafficking in 200 Grams or More of Fentanyl. The charge stemmed from information obtained by police from a confidential informant that the man was selling fentanyl from two apartments within a large apartment complex. Police conducted a controlled buy of fentanyl using the informant, which enabled them to identify one of the two apartments. Based on this information, police obtained a warrant to search this single apartment. Before executing the warrant, the man drove off from the building. Police stopped him and searched both the car and his person, finding both a quantity of fentanyl and a set of keys. Police used the keys to enter and execute their warrant inside the man’s apartment where they located more fentanyl, money, scales, and drug packaging materials. Police then took the keys they seized from the man, tried them in the door locks of other apartments in the building, and discovered the key unlocked the door to a second apartment. Police entered inside, looked around, then secured the premises while they obtained a second search warrant. Upon executing the warrant inside this second apartment, police discovered and seized over 7 kilograms of fentanyl and additional drug packaging materials. The man hired Massachusetts Criminal Defense Attorney, John L. Calcagni III, to represent him in his case.
Case Result: Motion to Suppress Over Seven (7) Kilograms of Fentanyl Allowed.
Attorney Calcagni filed a motion to suppress the drugs and evidence seized from the second apartment, arguing that the insertion of the key into the second apartment door was an unlawful warrantless search. Following an evidentiary hearing and submission of a legal memorandum in support of this position, the motion to suppress the evidence seized from the second apartment was allowed.