State v. Gregory

Missouri Court of Appeals

State v. Gregory

344 S.W.3d 300, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1031, 2011 WL 3444145

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 9, 2011

DocketWD 72297

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 344 S.W.3d 300 (State v. Gregory) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Gregory, 344 S.W.3d 300, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1031, 2011 WL 3444145 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Order

PER CURIAM.

This is a possession of a controlled substance case. The issue is whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that the accused had constructive possession of the subject drugs and knew of their presence and nature. The defendant was a passenger in a car that carried thirty baggies of marijuana in the trunk, and there were other incriminating facts that were sufficient to tie the defendant to the drugs so that a reasonable juror could conclude that he had: (1) knowledge of their presence and nature; and (2) access to and control over them. Therefore, we hold that there was sufficient evidence to establish the elements of possession of a controlled substance. Accordingly, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order

PER CURIAM.

This is a possession of a controlled substance case. The issue is whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that the accused had constructive possession of the subject drugs and knew of their presence and nature. The defendant was a passenger in a car that carried thirty baggies of marijuana in the trunk, and there were other incriminating facts that were sufficient to tie the defendant to the drugs so that a reasonable juror could conclude that he had: (1) knowledge of their presence and nature; and (2) access to and control over them. Therefore, we hold that there was sufficient evidence to establish the elements of possession of a controlled substance. Accordingly, we affirm. Rule 30.25(b).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

344 S.W.3d 300, 2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1031, 2011 WL 3444145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gregory-moctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack