Protect your rights, contact us today!
Protect your rights, contact us today!
Felony defense for manufacturing, cultivation, and precursor-chemical charges. Free consultation, six days a week
Manufacturing a controlled substance is a felony in Georgia under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30(b), and the charge covers far more than running a lab. It can reach growing a plant, running any part of a production process, or even possessing ordinary chemicals if the state believes you meant to use them to make a drug. Attorney Gregory Chancy defends manufacturing charges, challenging the search and the state’s proof of what you actually intended. The first call is free. Call (770) 627-3221.
Drug manufacturing is broader than most people expect. Under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30(b), it is unlawful to manufacture, deliver, distribute, dispense, administer, sell, or possess with intent to distribute any controlled substance, and Georgia law defines manufacturing to include producing, preparing, compounding, converting, and processing a drug. Growing marijuana plants counts. So does operating any step of a production process for a controlled substance.
The charge also reaches the ingredients and equipment. Possessing chemicals or materials with the intent to use them to make a controlled substance can itself support a manufacturing charge, which is why a case can be built around items that are perfectly legal to own on their own. To convict, the state generally has to prove two things: that you possessed the substance or materials, and that you intended to use them to manufacture an illegal drug. The second part, intent, is usually where the case is most vulnerable.
Manufacturing is charged across a wide range of situations, from a small marijuana grow to an alleged methamphetamine operation, and the specific facts shape both the exposure and the defense. What ties them together is that the state has to prove not just what was found, but what you were going to do with it.
Manufacturing is a felony, and the sentence depends on the drug involved. For a Schedule I or Schedule II controlled substance, manufacturing under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30(d) carries a felony sentence of 5 to 30 years in prison, and a second or subsequent offense carries the same range at the higher end. For Schedule III, IV, and V substances, the penalties are lower but still felony-level. Manufacturing marijuana, which includes cultivating or growing it, is a felony carrying 1 to 10 years under O.C.G.A. § 16-13-30(j).
Certain circumstances increase the exposure sharply. Manufacturing within 1,000 feet of a school, park, or housing project falls under a drug-free-zone enhancement, and involving a minor in the production of a drug carries its own mandatory penalties. Beyond the prison term, a conviction brings heavy fines, a permanent felony record, and the collateral consequences that follow any drug felony, including the loss of firearm rights and a driver’s license suspension. Because the sentence exposure is this high, early defense matters from the first day.
Because the materials in a manufacturing case are often legal on their own, the state usually has to prove what you meant to do with them, and it builds that from circumstantial evidence. Prosecutors point to the combination of items found together, any notes, recipes, or instructions, equipment associated with production, statements made around the time of the arrest, and any prior surveillance. Stacked up, these are offered as proof of an intent to manufacture.
The problem for the state is that circumstantial evidence is an inference, not a fact, and inferences can be answered. A chemical with a legitimate household or commercial use is not proof of a drug operation, and equipment can have an innocent purpose. The defense works to break the chain the state is trying to build, showing that the items are as consistent with lawful activity as with manufacturing. Where the state cannot firmly tie the materials to an illegal purpose, the intent element, and often the whole charge, comes into question.
A manufacturing defense focuses on the search, possession, and intent. These cases usually begin with a search of a home, vehicle, or property, so the first question is whether that search was lawful. Evidence from an unlawful search can be suppressed, and if the materials come out of the case, so often does the charge.
Possession is the next pressure point. When materials are found in a shared home or space, the state has to prove they were actually under your control, not just present where you were. Intent is the third and most contested, because the defense can offer the lawful explanation for items the state is casting as evidence of a drug operation. The defense also examines the lab testing, the identification of any actual controlled substance, and the chain of custody. In some cases the argument is that what was found amounts to preparation at most, not manufacturing. Pushing a charge down from manufacturing to a lesser offense, or defeating the intent element entirely, can change the whole exposure a person faces.
Gregory Chancy, Esq. is the attorney and founder of Cobb Defense, and he handles every drug case personally, from the first call through resolution. He earned his law degree from John Marshall Law School in Atlanta and has practiced law in Georgia since 2017, and he is an Active Member in Good Standing of the State Bar of Georgia with no public discipline on record. He is a member of the State Bar’s Criminal Law Section, along with the Cobb County Bar Association, the Georgia Trial Lawyers Association, and the American Bar Association. Before law, he spent more than fifteen years in engineering, a background that helps him take apart the technical and circumstantial evidence a manufacturing case is built on.
Clients work with attorney Chancy himself, not a rotating cast of staff, and every case is prepared as though it will go to trial. You can verify his license and standing with the State Bar of Georgia. Consultations are always free.
Manufacturing covers producing, preparing, compounding, converting, processing, or cultivating a controlled substance. It includes growing marijuana and operating any part of a production process, and it can reach the chemicals and equipment used to make a drug.
Yes. Possessing an otherwise legal substance can become a manufacturing charge if the state argues you intended to use it as a precursor chemical to make an illegal drug. Proving that intent is where these cases are often challenged.
Not necessarily. The charge can rest on possession of materials plus an intent to manufacture, rather than a finished product. That makes the evidence of intent, which is usually circumstantial, the center of the defense.
Yes. Cultivating marijuana falls under the manufacturing law and is charged as a felony. The penalties depend on the type and amount of the substance involved.
The defense looks at whether the search was lawful, whether the materials were truly in your control, and whether the state can prove intent rather than infer it. An unlawful search, a shared space, or an innocent explanation for the items can each undercut the charge.
The Law Office of Gregory Chancy defends drug manufacturing cases across its service area. Call (770) 627-3221 to confirm the office covers your area and to set up a free consultation.
A drug manufacturing charge can rest on an inference the state has to build, and that inference can be answered, but only if the case is reviewed early while the search and the evidence can still be challenged. Call (770) 627-3221 for a free consultation with attorney Gregory Chancy, or use the form on this page. Every conversation is confidential, and the first call costs nothing.
If you have questions about your case or need immediate legal assistance, please complete the confidential contact form.