PARIS – A Dixfield man was indicted on drug charges Friday by an Oxford County grand jury.

Danny Engberg, 51, of Drowns Road, was charged with aggravated trafficking in marijuana, a Class B felony; aggravated marijuana cultivation, a Class C felony; and criminal forfeiture of four firearms.

Engberg was to be summoned on the indictment charges that stemmed from an early morning execution of a no-knock search warrant on Aug. 31 at his home.

The indictment states that Engberg trafficked in more than one pound of marijuana on Aug. 31 by possessing it with the intent to sell, barter, exchange or otherwise furnish the pot for consideration.

Count two of the indictment states that Engberg, on Aug. 31, grew or cultivated more than five and fewer than 100 marijuana plants.

The charges are considered aggravated, because Engberg allegedly possessed a firearm at the time of the offenses.

The indictment also states that Dixfield police seized from Engberg’s residence four guns: a 20-gauge Mossberg pump shotgun, a .22-caliber Ruger semiautomatic rifle, a 12-gauge bolt-action J.C. Higgins shotgun, and a .50-caliber Traditions muzzleloader.

Engberg’s lawyer, Woody Hanstein III of Farmington, said Monday that the aggravated charges were bogus, in his opinion. That’s why he intended to immediately file a motion to suppress.

“The unloaded firearms had nothing to do with these few marijuana plants,” he said.

In an earlier interview, Hanstein said that Engberg and his 16-year-old son are hunters, who owned and enjoyed shooting the guns.

Friday’s indictment followed on the heels of last month’s intent to sue claim filed against Dixfield police and others by Engberg’s wife, Marilyn, on behalf of their son, Don.

Hanstein and Marilyn Engberg claim that police improperly obtained an unannounced-entry search warrant and improperly used excessive force to restrain the 16-year-old.

Police said they seized 68 marijuana plants, four guns and ammunition, drug paraphernalia, and a pound of processed marijuana during execution of the search warrant at 1 a.m.

The claim states that there was no legal justification for either the no-knock nighttime search, or the forcible physical assault.

A no-knock warrant is used when the possibility exists that officers’ lives could be endangered.