KENNETH RAY COLEMAN, PETITIONER,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• G.G. v. State, 84 So. 3d 1162 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
  …of the drugs and paraphernalia. Constructive possession is proved by showing that (1) the accused knew of the presence of the contraband, and (2) he could exercise dominion and control over it. See §§ 893.101, .13, Fla. Stat. (2010); Brown v. State, 8 So. 3d 464 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).1 Under either theory of possession, then, the State must prove that the accused had control of the contraband. See McCoy, 840 So. 2d at 456. And as we have consistently held, under either theory the requisite control is not esta…
• State v. Conisha A. Cadore, 59 So. 3d 1200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)
  …she had constructive possession of it. To establish a prima facie case based on constructive possession, the State had to establish that Cadore knew of the presence of the contraband and that she had dominion and control over it. See Brown v. State, 8 So. 3d 464, 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). The existence of these two elements can only be inferred if the premises where the contraband was found is in the accused’s exclusive possession. Robinson v. State, 975 So. 2d 593, 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). If possession of th…
• Cavokia Evans v. State, 26 So. 3d 85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
  …Holland, 975 So. 2d 595, 597 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008). Evans did not have exclusive possession of the cocaine at the time he was discovered by police; thus, the two elements cannot be inferred and must be proven by independent proof.4 See Brown v. State, 8 So. 3d 464, 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Holland, 975 So. 2d at 598. This proof “may consist of evidence that the defendant had actual knowledge of the presence of the contraband or evidence of incriminating statements or circumstances, other than simple proximity…