Controlled Substances

Question 1

Actual Possession

Answer 1

1. Had dominion or control over substance
2. Had knowledge of the presence of the substance
3. Had knowledge that the substance was a controlled substance

Question 2

Intent to Distribute

Answer 2

1. A law enforcement officer’s opinion that the quantity of drugs is clearly inconsistent with personal use is sufficient evidence to support a conviction. (California v. Peck)
2. However, the quantity may also need to be backed up with other evidence such as individual packaging or evidence of prior sales. (Missouri v. McLeod)
3. Evidence that is consistent with personal use is not evidence sufficient to convict on intent to distribute. (United States v. Hunt)

Question 3

Constructive Possession

Answer 3

1. Need intent to exercise dominion or control
2. ability to exercise dominion or control
3. Knows controlled substance is present

Question 4

Taylor constructive possession

Answer 4

If a defendant is found in a location (such as a car, a home, or a street corner) with contraband and others have access to that location as well, the defendant’s proximity to the contraband or his control over the location are not sufficient to prove he was in possession of the contraband.

Question 5

Wyoming constructive possession

Answer 5

a. Either individually or jointly with another exercised dominion and control over the substance;
b. Had knowledge of its presence; and
c. Had knowledge that the substance was a controlled substance.

Question 6

Automobile Rule

Answer 6

1. However, “the requisite inferences [of dominion or control] may be drawn from the location of weapons [or other contraband] in plain view and substantially within a defendant’s reach in the closer confines of an automobile.” (Rivas v. United States)
2. The Prosecution must then present only minimal evidence of some furtive gesture, such as trying to hide or dispose of the contraband, or which links the accused to an ongoing criminal operation of which that possession is a part.