FRANKLIN MULDER, PETITIONER,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By (23 total)

• Kahli Ubiles v. State, 23 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
  …raband cannot be inferred solely from the defendant’s proximity to the contraband in a jointly-occupied vehicle; rather, the State must present independent proof of the defendant’s knowledge and ability to control the contraband. Martoral v. State, 946 So. 2d 1240, 1242-43 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (citations omitted). The testimony adduced at the violation of probation hearing leads us to the inescapable conclusion that Ubiles had knowledge of the marijuana in his vehicle because it was in plain view. We need loo…
• Jennings v. State, 124 So. 3d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
  …s fact alone is sufficient evidence of knowledge. Brown, v. State, 428 So. 2d [*263] 250, 252 (Fla.1988), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1209, 103 S.Ct. 3541, 77 L.Ed.2d 1391 (1983); Jiles v. State, 984 So. 2d 622, 623 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Martoral v. State, 946 So. 2d 1240, 1243 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). This is not a case where officers found contraband concealed from the defendant. See, e.g., Brown v. State, 8 So. 3d 1187, 1189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (Xanex in a jewelry box); Earle v. State, 745 So. 2d 1087, 1090 (Fla. 4th…
• Sinclair v. State, 50 So. 3d 1223 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
  …uires the State to prove “ ‘that the defendant had knowledge of the presence of the [contraband] and the ability to exercise dominion and control over the same.’ ” Ubiles v. State, 23 So. 3d 1288, 1291 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting Martoral v. State, 946 So. 2d 1240, 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)). When the contraband is found in an area over which the [*1226] defendant had exclusive possession, the defendant’s knowledge of the contraband and ability to maintain control over it may be presumed. See Smith v. State, 7…

Authorities Cited

• Lescher v. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 946 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)