State v. Summers

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

State v. Summers

189 S.E.2d 807, 15 N.C. App. 282, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1901

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedJuly 12, 1972

Docket7226SC437

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 189 S.E.2d 807 (State v. Summers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Summers, 189 S.E.2d 807, 15 N.C. App. 282, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1901 (N.C. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, Judge.

There was no evidence of actual possession and the question presented is whether there was sufficient evidence of constructive possession to warrant submitting the case to the jury. We think there was.

An accused has possession of contraband material within the meaning of the law when he has both the power and intent to control its disposition or use. “Where such materials are found on the premises under the control of an accused, this fact, in and of itself, gives rise to an inference of knowledge and possession which may be sufficient to carry the case to *284 the jury on a charge of unlawful possession.” State v. Harvey, 281 N.C. 1, 187 S.E. 2d 706. Here, the evidence was sufficient to permit the jury to find that the backyard where the marihuana was found was under defendant’s control. There was a chain link fence around the backyard and a large dog was in the yard. The marihuana was found at a point in the yard “practically up against the house.” In State v. Spencer, 281 N.C. 121, 187 S.E. 2d 779, the State’s evidence was held sufficient to support a jury finding that areas more remote from the accused’s living quarters than here shown were under his control.

We hold that defendant’s motions to dismiss were properly overruled. Defendant’s remaining assignment of error, directed to admission of the testimony of the clerk of the City Water Department, is without merit.

No error.

Judges Vaughn and Graham concur.

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

PARKER, Judge.

There was no evidence of actual possession and the question presented is whether there was sufficient evidence of constructive possession to warrant submitting the case to the jury. We think there was.

An accused has possession of contraband material within the meaning of the law when he has both the power and intent to control its disposition or use. “Where such materials are found on the premises under the control of an accused, this fact, in and of itself, gives rise to an inference of knowledge and possession which may be sufficient to carry the case to *284 the jury on a charge of unlawful possession.” State v. Harvey, 281 N.C. 1, 187 S.E. 2d 706. Here, the evidence was sufficient to permit the jury to find that the backyard where the marihuana was found was under defendant’s control. There was a chain link fence around the backyard and a large dog was in the yard. The marihuana was found at a point in the yard “practically up against the house.” In State v. Spencer, 281 N.C. 121, 187 S.E. 2d 779, the State’s evidence was held sufficient to support a jury finding that areas more remote from the accused’s living quarters than here shown were under his control.

We hold that defendant’s motions to dismiss were properly overruled. Defendant’s remaining assignment of error, directed to admission of the testimony of the clerk of the City Water Department, is without merit.

No error.

Judges Vaughn and Graham concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

189 S.E.2d 807, 15 N.C. App. 282, 1972 N.C. App. LEXIS 1901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-summers-ncctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack