Report: Timberwolves Beasley arrested for marijuana possession
Report: Timberwolves Beasley arrested for marijuana possession
Oh, Michael Beasley, just when we think you are getting another chance and maybe getting things together. Timberwolves forward Michael Beasley was arrested for marijuana possession and speeding in Minnesota last week, according to NBC 11 KARE in Minneapolis/St. Paul. Beasley was pulled over on June 26 for speeding around 3 a.m. on Interstate 394…
Read more on NBC Sports: ProBasketballTalk
Pair accused of felony marijuana possession after I.F. area traffic stop
Pair accused of felony marijuana possession after I.F. area traffic stop
A pair from Heron, Mont., face felony possession of marijuana charges after a traffic stop Thursday about 5:39 p.m. on Interstate 15 near Idaho Falls, according to Idah State Police.
Read more on Idaho State Journal
University of Connecticut Swingman Jamal Coombs-McDaniel Arrested on Marijuana Possession Charge
University of Connecticut Swingman Jamal Coombs-McDaniel Arrested on Marijuana Possession Charge
HARTFORD, Conn. — Jamal Coombs-McDaniel, a swingman on Connecticut’s national championship basketball team, has been arrested on a marijuana possession charge. Campus police say the sophomore from Dorchester, Mass., was arrested Thursday night along with two people at Merritt Hall, a campus dormitory. Jamal Coombs-McDaniel was arrested on campus and charged with possession of marijuana, police …
Read more on New England Sports Network
Teen backs into Hackettstown police car, is charged with marijuana possession
Teen backs into Hackettstown police car, is charged with marijuana possession
A Belvidere resident was charged with driving under the influence and possession of marijuana after… – 11:37 pm State health officials announced Monday that facilities that will grow and dispense medicinal…
Read more on Daily Record
Florida CB Janoris Jenkins arrested again, this time on marijuana possession charge
Florida CB Janoris Jenkins arrested again, this time on marijuana possession charge
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – Florida cornerback Janoris Jenkins has been arrested on a marijuana possession charge, his second arrest in the past 20 months. It’s also the first arrest under new coach Will Muschamp, who vowed to have players represent the university “the Florida way.”
Read more on Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune
Driver who hit fire truck accused of marijuana possession
Driver who hit fire truck accused of marijuana possession
A driver who’s car hit a fire truck as it pulled up to a fire hydrant to refill while crews battled a fully involved house fire on Broadway in Darien was charged following the accident with unlawful possession of marijuana. Wallace Eugene Urf, 33, of Pavilion Center Road, Pavilion, was allegedly found in possession of marijuana by Deputy Lonnie Nati as Nati investigated the accident. Urf was …
Read more on The Batavian
Country star Willie Nelson arrested for marijuana possession
Country star Willie Nelson arrested for marijuana possession
Country music legend Willie Nelson has been arrested for marijuana possession. A U-S Border Patrol spokesman says Nelson was apprehended Friday at a checkpoint in western Texas.
Read more on KHQA Tri-States
What does unlawful possession of drugs refer to?
Is this refering to drugs like cocaine or to drugs like being found with pills that you bought from someone…like pain killers?
The news paper didn’t say whether it was a controlled drug or a scheduled drug.
Virginia Marijuana Possession Intent Distribute Smell Traffic Driving Fairfax County Richmond Beach Prince William Loudoun Lynchburg Fredericksburg
Ervin v. Commonwealth, Va. Ct. App. June 22, 2010
The officers stopped a vehicle being driven by appellant after the officers observed a traffic violation. There were no other occupants in the car. As the officers approached the driver’s side of the vehicle, they smelled a strong odor of marijuana coming from the car. There was no evidence that the odor detected by the officers was coming from appellant’s person. Based on the smell of marijuana emanating from the vehicle, the officers took appellant into custody and searched the vehicle for evidence of marijuana and for the vehicle’s registration. Officer Rad removed the vehicle’s ignition key and used the key to unlock the glove compartment. In the glove compartment, the officers immediately observed two Ziploc bags containing what was later determined to be marijuana. One of the bags held ten small, knotted plastic bag corners of fresh marijuana. The other bag contained thirteen knotted plastic bag corners of fresh marijuana. The officers did not recover any smoking devices or other drug paraphernalia from appellant or the vehicle. After denying appellant’s motions to strike the evidence as insufficient, the trial court found appellant guilty of possession with intent to distribute marijuana and driving on a suspended license.
To sustain a conviction for possession of marijuana, “[t]he Commonwealth was required to prove that [appellant] ‘intentionally and consciously possessed’ the [marijuana], either actually or constructively, with knowledge of its nature and character.” Proof of constructive possession necessarily rests on circumstantial evidence; thus, ‘all necessary circumstances proved must be consistent with guilt and inconsistent with innocence and exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. ‘The law is well established that possession of the means to exercise dominion [and] control over an item gives the possessor dominion [and] control over the item [itself.]‘” Wright v. Commonwealth, 53 Va. App. 266, 274, 670 S.E.2d 772, 776 (2009) (quoting Bell v. Commonwealth, 21 Va. App. 693, 698-99, 467 S.E.2d 289, 291-92 (1996)). Thus, evidence of appellant’s possession of the key that controlled access to the interior of the glove compartment supports the trial court’s conclusion that the marijuana baggies, which were immediately visible upon opening the glove compartment, were subject to appellant’s dominion and control. However, the Commonwealth was required to prove both that appellant exercised dominion and control over the item, as shown by his possession of the keys to the locked glove compartment, and that he was aware of the presence and character of the marijuana.
“[W]hile proximity is a factor to be considered along with other evidence, mere proximity [to marijuana] is not sufficient to prove possession.” The evidence established that when the officers approached the driver’s side of the vehicle, they smelled a strong odor of marijuana coming from the car. There was no evidence that the odor detected by the officers was coming from appellant’s person, that appellant appeared intoxicated, that appellant showed any physical signs of having recently used marijuana, or that appellant possessed any drugs or drug paraphernalia on his person. The record does not establish whether the officers smelled fresh marijuana or burnt marijuana. However, the trial judge interpreted the evidence as suggesting the odor was that of burnt marijuana: “The only testimony is [appellant] used the car and he was in the car when marijuana was being used, at least I think you can infer that from the evidence . . . .” (Emphasis added). 5 There is no indication that the odor was that of fresh marijuana, which might indicate that appellant had at least reason to suspect the vehicle contained fresh marijuana. Instead, the trial court found that the odor coming from the vehicle was that of burnt marijuana, suggesting someone was smoking marijuana before the officers approached. In reaching its conclusion, the trial court more particularly stated, “Perhaps other people were in the car, perhaps other people knew about the marijuana, [but] that doesn’t provide a defense for this odor.” In fact, appellant was under no obligation to provide a defense for this odor. Rather, the Commonwealth was required to prove constructive possession of the marijuana in its case-in-chief. As more fully discussed herein, there was no direct evidence of appellant’s constructive possession of the marijuana in the glove compartment, and the circumstantial evidence was simply insufficient as a matter of law. Evidence of the smell of burnt marijuana simply does not provide a nexus from which the trial court could conclude appellant knew of the fresh marijuana in the glove compartment. The Commonwealth of Virginia notes that appellant was the sole person with means to access the glove compartment containing the marijuana. While this establishes appellant’s dominion and control over the vehicle and the items located therein. In this case, the key that unlocked the glove compartment was the same key that was necessary to operate the vehicle. Put simply, the fact that appellant possessed that key does not logically lead to the inference that appellant knew of the glove compartment’s contents.
Given the factual determinations made by the trial court, the evidence is at best in equipoise. Even assuming the trial judge determined appellant was familiar with the smell of marijuana, based on appellant’s equivocal testimony regarding that fact, there was no evidence presented by the Commonwealth suggesting appellant’s familiarity with that smell proved that he had smoked marijuana in the vehicle, or knew the vehicle contained fresh marijuana at the time he was driving the vehicle. Further, the record contains no other facts or circumstances to support a finding of guilt. As appellant correctly asserts, the Commonwealth presented no evidence to suggest appellant made any motion toward the glove compartment as police stopped the vehicle, or that appellant engaged in any other behavior that would indicate he knew there were drugs in the car. There was no evidence that appellant appeared nervous, and in fact, the officers testified that appellant was entirely cooperative throughout the traffic stop.
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
The SRIS Law Group drug crimes defense lawyers defend clients charged with drug offenses throughout Virginia.
What are the charges for breaking and entry and possession of drugs?
Im 15 and i broke into someones house and stole a bunch of hydrocodone, morphine, and random other drugs idk what they called. I know i probly had like 2-3 ounces if u add everything up together. Im not sure if they count all ur drugs up and sentence u or if its like ok so much of this drug, then so much of that drug, and so on. So anyone know what im looking at here?