DOTSON

v.

KANSAS

Citator

Cited By (38 total)

• Bernardino Chirez Hernandez v. United States, 300 F.2d 114 (9th Cir. 1962)
  …rugs] in one’s control or under one’s dominion.” Mullaney v. United States, 82 F. 2d 638, 642 (9th Cir. 1936), and we have recently reexamined and re-affirmed this basic position. Rodella v. United States, 286 F. 2d 306 (9th Cir. 1960), cert. denied 365 U.S. 889, 81 S.Ct. 1042, 6 L.Ed.2d 199.2 As the Rodella opinion and the authorities which it cites amply demonstrate, it follows from this definition of “possession” in Section 174 that so long as the evidence establishes the requisite power in the defendant…

  ← 1 / 3 →
• United States v. Susanne M. Hutchinson, 488 F.2d 484 (8th Cir. 1973)
  …“Constructive possession” has been generally defined as knowingly having both the power and intention at a given time to exercise dominion or control over the property. Rodella v. United States, 286 F. 2d 306, 311-312 (9th Cir. 1960), cert. denied, 365 U.S. 889, 81 S.Ct. 1042, 6 L.Ed.2d 199 (1961), cited in United States v. Dugan, supra, 477 F. 2d at 141. [C]ontrol over the apartment or automobile where the narcotic is found is strong evidence of control over the narcotic. It does not have to be exclusive…
• Smith v. United States, 385 F.2d 34 (5th Cir. 1967)
  …r. 1964); Mack v. United States, 326 F. 2d 481 (8th Cir. 1964). . Brown v. United States, 222 F. 2d 293 (9th Cir. 1955). . Knapp v. United States, 311 F. 2d 71 (5th Cir. 1962); Rodella v. United States, 286 F. 2d 306 (9th Cir. 1960), cert. denied, 365 U.S. 889, 81 S.Ct. 1042, 6 L.Ed.2d 199 (1961). But mere presence in the area of the narcotic or awareness of its location is not sufficient to establish possession. Bass v. United States, 326 F. 2d 884 (8th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 905, 84 S.Ct. 11…