R.L., A JUVENILE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This case reviews a juvenile's adjudication of delinquency for marijuana possession. The appellate court affirmed the decision, finding sufficient evidence of knowing possession based on the juvenile's actions and the packaging of the drugs.
Yes, there was adequate circumstantial evidence to establish the juvenile's knowing possession of marijuana. The juvenile's actions of retrieving, inspecting, and then returning the bag containing marijuana to the garbage can, coupled with the "Sure Shot" marking on the envelopes, demonstrated guilty knowledge.
[1] Circumstantial evidence, including the act of concealing contraband and markings on the packaging, can establish guilty knowledge of possession of drugs.
[2] A defendant's actions of retrieving a bag from a garbage can, inspecting it, and then returning it to the garbage can upon the approach of a police officer may constitute…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This act, plus the “sure shot” marking shows, in our view, that the respondent had guilty knowledge that the bag contained contraband drugs, an essential element of the crime.”
Establishes the court's reasoning for finding guilty knowledge based on the respondent's actions and the drug packaging.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA police officer observed the respondent, a juvenile, reaching into a garbage can, retrieving a brown bag, inspecting it, and then returning it to the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Guilty Knowledge cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Respondent was adjudicated delinquent for possession of marijuana. We affirm.
The facts reflect that a police officer encountered respondent while patrolling a high crime area at approximately 6:45 a.m. He observed from a distance respondent reach into a garbage can, retrieve a brown bag and start to inspect it. As he approached, he also saw respondent return the bag to the garbage can. Immediately thereafter, the police officer searched the garbage can to find a brown bag containing small manila envelopes labelled “Sure Shot” (a local trade name or brand name for drugs). Subsequently, he discovered that the small manila envelopes contained marijuana.
Upon a petition for delinquency and sounding, the respondent entered a plea of denial to the charge of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
At trial, at the close of the State’s case and again at the close of all the evidence, the respondent moved for a judgment of acquittal based on the insufficiency of the evidence against him.
The trial court granted the motion as to the charge of possession with intent to distribute, but found the defendant delinquent as to the lesser charge of possession of marijuana. The respondent appeals this decision.. We agree with the State’s position that there was adequate circumstantial evidence to establish respondent’s knowing possession of marijuana. At present (unlike the cases cited by respondent) there is direct evidence that respondent had actual possession of the subject package, that the respondent “looked upward and saw the police car” as the police officer approached the respondent; thereafter, the respondent placed the bags of marijuana back in the garbage. This act, plus the “sure shot” marking shows, in our view, that the respondent had guilty knowledge that the bag contained contraband drugs, an essential element of the crime. Collier v. State, 509 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Kresbach v. State, 462 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Kresbach v. State, 462 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Collier v. State, 509 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)