ARTHUR ANDREWS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Drug Paraphernalia cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Acting Chief Judge.
Arthur Andrews appeals the denial of his motion to dismiss the charge of possession of cocaine. He alleges that the basis for the possession was residue found in a glass pipe and, citing to Lord v. State, 616 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), argues that trace amounts of an illegal drug on a common item support a conviction for possession of paraphernalia, but not a conviction for possession of the drug itself.
This case is clearly distinguishable from Lord, where the cocaine residue was found on a dollar bill. The dollar bill was described as a “common object.” Lupper, 663 So. 2d at 1339. While a simple glass pipe might have a lawful use, see Subuh v. State, 732 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), here, the glass pipe was described as one “commonly used for smoking street level narcotics” and contained residue resulting from smoking cocaine. The pipe here was analogous to the adulterated beer can in Lupper v. State, 663 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (holding that cocaine residue on beer can altered for use as drug paraphernalia supported conviction for possession of cocaine).
Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Andrews’ conviction for possession of cocaine.
CASANUEVA and STRINGER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 784 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…sidue was found on “an implement which is usable only for the obviously knowing use of the drug.” Id. at 1002. Like the dollar bill in Lord, the box cutter seized from Davis is an object commonly used for legitimate purposes. Cf. Andrews v. State, 787 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (upholding conviction for possession of cocaine based on residue found in glass pipe). Accordingly, we reverse the [*1226] judgment of conviction. On remand, the trial court is directed to discharge Davis. Reversed and remanded…
-
Carvel Holloman v. State, 211 So. 3d 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)…*152] case, this court affirmed a conviction for possession of cocaine where there was a trace amount of burnt cocaine residue on an altered beer can, which a police officer identified as drug paraphernalia. Similarly, the court in Andrews v. State, 787 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), affirmed a conviction for possession of cocaine where the defendant possessed a glass pipe with cocaine residue. The court explained that “[w]hile a simple glass pipe might have a lawful use, here, the glass pipe was described as…
-
Boles v. State, 819 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Andrews v. State, 787 So. 2d 54, 55 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Jones v. State, 589 So. 2d 1001, 1002-03 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). WARNER, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lord v. State, 616 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Lupper v. State, 663 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Subuh v. State, 732 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)