From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Briggs v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 23, 1972
262 So. 2d 451 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Opinion

No. 71-1398.

May 23, 1972.

Appeal from the Criminal Court of Record, Dade County, Jack M. Turner, J.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Alan S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Arnold R. Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Barry J. Clyman, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.


After a non-jury trial, defendant-appellant was convicted of possession of marijuana and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. On this appeal he urges the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment.

Evidence in a criminal prosecution for possession of marijuana must show that defendant had knowledge that the contraband was in his possession and control. Langdon v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 235 So.2d 321; Frank v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 199 So.2d 117. In the instant case the evidence was sufficient to warrant a conclusion by the trier of fact that defendant knew of the presence of the narcotics and was able to exercise personal dominion over the contraband. This was sufficient to constitute unlawful possession. Zicca v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 232 So.2d 414; Spataro v. State, Fla.App. 1965, 179 So.2d 873.

After careful consideration of appellant's other points on appeal, we find them to be without merit.

The judgment of conviction herein appealed is, therefore, affirmed.


Summaries of

Briggs v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 23, 1972
262 So. 2d 451 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)
Case details for

Briggs v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES HERBERT BRIGGS, APPELLANT, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: May 23, 1972

Citations

262 So. 2d 451 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Citing Cases

Skold v. State

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in finding him guilty because the state failed to establish…

Ramirez v. State

Constructive possession is based upon knowledge of the presence of the drug coupled with ability to maintain…