Bailey v. State
267 So. 2d 351, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6135
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bailey v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 295 So. 2d 133 →
Opinion
We have examined the record and briefs filed in this appeal. We feel the requirements of the Frank v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 117, Markman v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 210 So.2d 486 and Arant v. State, First District Court of Appeal, 256 So.2d 515, opinion filed January 18, 1972, cases have been met here. There was ample evidence [352]*352submitted to the jury that defendant had sufficient knowledge of and control over the drugs to constitute possession. We, therefore, affirm.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bailey v. State, 267 So. 2d 351, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6135 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).
267 So. 2d 351 (Bailey v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Arant v. State
256 So. 2d 515 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1972)
Frank v. State
199 So. 2d 117 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1967)
Markman v. State
210 So. 2d 486 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)